DETAILED ACTION
Application Status
Claims 1-21 are pending and have been examined in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 1-21 has been reviewed and considered.
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 § 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.
Claims 4-10 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.
Claim 4 recites, “the USB C controller is configured to negotiate whether power is being supplied to or drawn from the plurality of battery cells”. The meaning of the term “negotiate” is unclear within the context of the claim. In particular, it is unclear if the USB C controller is configured to merely determine whether power is being supplied or drawn or configured to have an effect on whether power is being supplied or drawn.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-4, 12-13, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Spaeth (US 20250385536 A1). Note, US 20250385536 A1 claims priority to DE-102022207058, filed 07/11/2022, which appears to fully support the U.S publication.
With respect to claim 1, Spaeth discloses: An energy storage device (18, Fig. 4b) for a bicycle comprising: a housing (98) comprising a mounting arrangement (102) adapted for mounting to the bicycle; a plurality of battery cells (22) disposed in the housing; a battery management (24) system disposed in the housing and connected to the plurality of battery cells, wherein the battery management system is configured to monitor a voltage of the plurality of battery cells (see paragraph [0037]); a charge controller (36) disposed in the housing and communicating with the battery management system, wherein the charge controller is connected to the plurality of cells and is configured to modulate a current supplied to the plurality of cells (see paragraph [0042]); and a charge port (32) mounted on the housing and configured for electrical connection to a bicycle drive unit.
With respect to claim 2, Spaeth discloses: The energy storage device of claim 1 wherein the charge port comprises a DC charge port (32; see "DC voltage", paragraph [0040]) and further comprising a USB C charge port (62; also see paragraph [0049]) mounted on the housing and configured for connection to an external power source.
With respect to claim 3, Spaeth discloses: The energy storage device of claim 2 wherein the charge port comprises a plate (see annotated figure below), wherein the DC charge (32,66) port and the USB C charge port (32,62) are co-located on the plate.
PNG
media_image1.png
348
294
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 4, Spaeth discloses: The energy storage device of claim 2 further comprising a USB C controller and a microcontroller(24; also see “multiple microprocessors”, paragraph [0037]) disposed in the housing (“included in the housing”, paragraph [0056]), wherein the USB C controller is connected to the USB C charge port, and wherein the microcontroller is connected to the USB C controller and to the battery management system, wherein the USB C controller is configured to negotiate whether power is being supplied to or drawn from the plurality of battery cells (see “monitors and/or discharging process”). Note, the “USB C controller” and “a microcontroller” are considered to be comprised by the electronic unit disclosed by Spaeth since the electronic unit disclosed by Spaeth comprises multiple microprocessors (see paragraph [0037]) and performs the same functions as the claimed controller and microprocessor.
With respect to claim 12, Spaeth discloses: An energy storage device (18, Fig. 4b) for a bicycle comprising: a housing (98); a plurality of battery cells (22) disposed in the housing; a battery management system (24) disposed in the housing and connected to the plurality of battery cells, wherein the battery management system is configured to monitor a voltage of the plurality of battery cells (see paragraph [0037]); a charge controller (36) disposed in the housing and communicating with the battery management system, wherein the charge controller is connected to the plurality of battery cells and is configured to modulate a current supplied to the plurality of battery cells (see paragraph [0042]); a battery contact connection (32) located on the housing and configured for electrical connection to a bicycle drive unit; and a USB C charge port (32,62) located on the housing and separate from the battery contact connection.
With respect to claim 13, Spaeth discloses: The energy storage device of claim 12 wherein the housing comprises a plate, wherein the battery contact connection comprises a DC charge port (32,66), wherein the DC charge port and the USB C charge port (32,62) are co-located on the plate.
With respect to claim 15, Spaeth discloses: The energy storage device of claim 12 further comprising a USB C controller and a microcontroller(24; also see “multiple microprocessors”, paragraph [0037]) disposed in the housing (“included in the housing”, paragraph [0056]), wherein the USB C controller is connected to the USB C charge port, and wherein the microcontroller is connected to the USB C controller and to the battery management system, wherein the USB C controller is configured to negotiate whether power is being supplied to or drawn from the plurality of battery cells (see “monitors and/or discharging process”).
Note, the “USB C controller” and “a microcontroller” are considered to be comprised by the electronic unit disclosed by Spaeth since the electronic unit disclosed by Spaeth comprises multiple microprocessors (see paragraph [0037]) and performs the same functions as the claimed controller and microprocessor.
With respect to claim 17, Spaeth discloses: The energy storage device of claim 15 wherein the microcontroller comprises a radio (see “ZigBee”, paragraph [0024]) configured to provide a wireless communication system.
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.
Claims 5-6, 14, and 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spaeth (US 20250385536 A1).
With respect to claim 5, Spaeth discloses: The energy storage device of claim 4 further comprising an inertial measurement unit configured to measure an acceleration ("acceleration sensor", paragraph [0052]) of the housing, and is connected to the microcontroller (see paragraph [0052]).
Spaeth is silent in teaching that the inertial measurement unit is disposed in the housing.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Spaeth to have the inertial measurement unit disposed within the housing because such a modification would be a mere rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C.). Such a person would have been motivated to make such a modification to ensure that the inertial measurement unit is protected against impact.
With respect to claim 6, Spaeth discloses: The energy storage device of claim 4 wherein the microcontroller comprises a radio (see “ZigBee”, paragraph [0024]) configured to provide a wireless communication system.
With respect to claim 14, Spaeth discloses: The energy storage device of claim 12 wherein the housing comprises spaced apart opposite sidewalls and a peripheral wall extending between and connected to the sidewalls (see annotated figure below), wherein the USB C charge port is mounted on one of the sidewalls, but is silent in teaching that the battery contact connection is mounted on the peripheral wall.
PNG
media_image2.png
358
314
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Spaeth to arrive at the claimed invention. Such a modification would have been considered obvious because it is a mere rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C.). Such a person would have been motivated to make the modification to provide access to charging/discharging ports of the battery from multiple angles.
With respect to claim 16, Spaeth disclose: The energy storage device of claim 15 further comprising an inertial measurement unit configured to measure an acceleration of the housing ("acceleration sensor", paragraph [0052]), wherein the inertial measurement unit is disposed in the housing and is connected to the microcontroller.
Spaeth is silent in teaching that the inertial measurement unit is disposed in the housing.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Spaeth to have the inertial measurement unit disposed within the housing because such a modification would be a mere rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04 VI. C.). Such a person would have been motivated to make such a modification to ensure that the inertial measurement unit is protected against impact.
Claims 7-10 and 18-21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spaeth (US 20250385536 A1) in view of Yung (US 20150115898 A1).
With respect to claims 7 and 8, Spaeth discloses: the energy storage device of claim 4 but is silent in teaching that the microcontroller is configured to select a charge source from a first power source connected to the DC charge port and/or a second power source connected to the USB C charge port.
Yung discloses a method of charging a battery, comprising: providing a first power source (101a) and a second power source (101b), and selecting, by a microcontroller, the second power source if the voltage of the second power source is greater than the voltage of the first power source (“select the first power source when the first voltage is greater than the second voltage”, paragraph [0019]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Spaeth in view of Yung to arrive at the claimed invention and to improve charging speeds by using the power source with the highest voltage.
With respect to claim 8, Spaeth in view of Greening as modified above discloses: The energy storage device of claim 7, but is silent in teaching that the first power source has a first voltage and the second power source has a second voltage, wherein the microcontroller is configured to select the first power source if the first voltage is greater than the second voltage and is configured to select the second power source if the second voltage is greater than the first voltage.
With respect to claim 9, Yung discloses that first power source (101a) and second power source (101b) may have the same voltage (see paragraph [0039]). Yung further discloses selecting the power source with the highest current (see paragraph [0060]). When the voltages of the first and second power sources are the same, selecting the power source with the highest current is equivalent to selecting the power source with the highest output power because electrical power is calculated as the product of voltage and current. Accordingly, Spaeth in view of Yung as modified discloses: The energy storage device of claim 7 wherein the first power source has a first power output and the second power source has a second power output, wherein the microcontroller is configured to select the first power source if the first power output is greater than the second power output and is configured to select the second power source if the second power output is greater than the first power output.
With respect to claim 10, Yung discloses that, “the power source inputs can be 1.5 V DC, 2.7 V DC, 3 V DC, 3.3 V DC, 5 V DC, 6 V DC, 7.5 V DC, 9 V DC, 12 V DC, or any combination thereof” (see paragraph [0039]) and further discloses, “the first full battery voltage can be 12 V” (see paragraph [0044]). When the first battery has a desired final charge of 12 V and one of the power sources has a voltage of 12 V while the other power source has a voltage of less than 12 V, selecting the power source with the higher voltage would be equivalent to selecting the power source with a voltage closest to a desired final charge voltage. Accordingly, Spaeth in view of Yung as modified is considered to disclose the limitations of claim 10.
With respect to claims 18 and 19, Spaeth discloses: the energy storage device of claim 15 but is silent in teaching: the microcontroller is configured to select a charge source from a first power source connected to the battery contact connection and/or a second power source connected to the USB C charge port.
Yung discloses a method of charging a battery, comprising: providing a first power source (101a) and a second power source (101b), and selecting, by a microcontroller, the second power source if the voltage of the second power source is greater than the voltage of the first power source (“select the first power source when the first voltage is greater than the second voltage”, paragraph [0019]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Spaeth in view of Yung to arrive at the claimed invention and to improve charging speeds by using the power source with the highest voltage.
With respect to claim 20, Spaeth in view of Yung as modified above discloses that first power source (101a) and second power source (101b) may have the same voltage (see paragraph [0039]). Yung further discloses selecting the power source with the highest current (see paragraph [0060]). When the voltages of the first and second power sources are the same, selecting the power source with the highest current is equivalent to selecting the power source with the highest output power because electrical power is calculated as the product of voltage and current. Accordingly, Spaeth in view of Yung as modified discloses: The energy storage device of claim 7 wherein the first power source has a first power output and the second power source has a second power output, wherein the microcontroller is configured to select the first power source if the first power output is greater than the second power output and is configured to select the second power source if the second power output is greater than the first power output.
With respect to claim 21, Yung discloses that, “the power source inputs can be 1.5 V DC, 2.7 V DC, 3 V DC, 3.3 V DC, 5 V DC, 6 V DC, 7.5 V DC, 9 V DC, 12 V DC, or any combination thereof” (see paragraph [0039]) and further discloses, “the first full battery voltage can be 12 V” (see paragraph [0044]). When the first battery has a desired final charge of 12 V and one of the power sources has a voltage of 12 V while the other power source has a voltage of less than 12 V, selecting the power source with the higher voltage would be equivalent to selecting the power source with a voltage closest to a desired final charge voltage. Accordingly, Spaeth in view of Yung as modified is considered to disclose the limitations of claim 10.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 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.
Regarding claim 11, the closest prior art made of record is Talavasek (US 20160375954 A1). Talavasek discloses a bicycle comprising a motor, wherein the motor comprises a housing; and a guard (40, Fig. 3) pivotally coupled to a chain stay (see paragraph [0026]), wherein the guard is pivotable between a closed position and an open position. Talavasek is silent in teaching the claimed first and second supports, wherein the guard forms at least a portion of a bridge between the first and second supports and the claimed fastener and tool combination, wherein the fastener secures the housing to the motor housing, and wherein the tool component is engageable with one of a first or second mounting features. Suggestions to modify Talavasek to arrive at the claimed invention were not reasonably found in the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and discloses systems and methods for charging and discharging batteries in general.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew D Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-6087. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. (7:30 - 5:00 EST).
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, Paul Dickson can be reached at (571) 272-7742. 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.
/MATTHEW D LEE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/PAUL N DICKSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614