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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the length of the abstract is over 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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 nonobviousness.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi et al. (CN 204334033U, English machine translation) in view of Karanikos et al. (US 2017/0070076).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Shi teaches a charging device (figs. 1-9 and [0001]) for charging a wearable device (smart watch, intelligent bracelet), comprising: a charger housing comprising a charger size that corresponds to a size of the wearable device ([0006] and [0008]), a charger assembly comprising one or more mechanical component (fig. 5) configured to engage with one or more mechanical components of the charger housing of the wireless charger to secure the charger assembly within the charger housing, the charger assembly comprising: an inductive charging component configured to wirelessly interface with an additional inductive charging component of the wearable device to charge the wearable device through the charger housing ([0027], [0028] and [0050]+); a power line coupled to an external power source ([0026] and [0027]).
Shi is silent to one or more conductive pads and printed circuit board as claimed.
However, Karanikos teaches a wireless charger for wearable device comprising: a charger housing ([0046] and [0048]) comprising a charger size that corresponds to a size of the wearable device ([0046]-[0048]); a charger assembly ([0060]) comprising one or more mechanical component ([0066]) configured to engage with one or more mechanical components of the charger housing of the wireless charger to secure the charger assembly within the charger housing (figs. 3A-4C), the charger assembly comprising: an inductive charging component configured to wirelessly interface with an additional inductive charging component of the wearable device to charge the wearable device through the charger housing (fig. 2); and one or more conductive pads electrically coupled with the inductive charging component (fig. 7B and [0085]); and a printed circuit board (708) configured to electrically couple the charger assembly to an external power source, the printed circuit board comprising an electrical contact component configured to electrically and physically contact the one or more conductive pads at one of a plurality of locations along a length of the one or more conductive pads based at least in part on the charger size (fig. 7B and [0081]-[0087]).
In view of Karanikos’s teaching, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Liang by incorporating the teaching as taught by Karanikos in order to arrive at the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 2 and 16, Shi as modified by Karanikos teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Shi further teaches wherein the electrical contact component of the printed circuit board contacts the one or more conductive pads at a first location along the length of the one or more conductive pads based at least in part on the charger housing comprising a first charger size, and wherein the electrical contact component of the printed circuit board contacts the one or more conductive pads at a second location along the length of the one or more conductive pads based at least in part on the charger housing comprising a second charger size that is different from the first charger size (fig. 9, [0008] and [0051]+).
Regarding claims 3 and 17, Shi as modified by Karanikos teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Shi further teaches wherein a position of the printed circuit board within the charger housing remains constant regardless of the charger size, and wherein a position of the charger assembly within the charger housing changes based at least in part on the charger size (figs. 4-7. [0030], [0051] and [0073]-[0074]).
Regarding claims 4, 5, 18 and 19, Shi as modified by Karanikos teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Shi further teaches a compressible material configured to exert a force that pushes the inductive charging component against a surface of the charger housing and further limitations as claimed (23, fig. 9 and [0056]-[0058]).
Regarding claim 6, Shi as modified by Karanikos teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Both Shi and Karanikos further teach wherein the charger assembly further comprises: one or more mechanical component configured to engage with one or more additional mechanical component of the charger housing to secure the charger assembly within the charger housing (Shi: fig. 9. Karanikos: figs. 3B and 7A).
Regarding claim 7, Shi as modified by Karanikos teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Shi further teaches the charger assembly comprises a single assembly size (the stepped lug boss) that is couplable to a plurality of charging devices (each of the stepped lug boss) exhibiting a plurality of charger sizes including the charger size (fig. 9).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Shi as modified by Karanikos teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Shi further teaches wherein a position of the charger assembly within the charger housing is based at least in part on the charger size, and wherein the charger assembly is configured to be adjustably moved within the charger housing in order to transition the charger size between a plurality of charger sizes and further limitations (fig. 9 and [0050]+).
Regarding claims 10-12, Shi as modified by Karanikos teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Shi further teaches wherein the wearable device comprises a wearable ring device, and wherein the charger housing comprises: a charger base, wherein the printed circuit board is position within the charger base; and a charger post extending from the charger base, wherein the wearable ring device is configured to at least partially surround the charger post when being charged by the charging device, and wherein the charger assembly is positioned at least partially within the charger post and further limitations as claimed (figs. 1-6 and [0050]+).
Regarding claims 13 and 20, Shi as modified by Karanikos teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Karanikos further teaches a magnetic component configured to magnetically configured to magnetically interact with an additional magnetic component of the wearable device to orient the wearable device on or within the charging device for charging ([0101], [0104] and [0106]).
Regarding claim 14, Shi as modified by Karanikos teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Both Shi and Karanikos further teach wherein the external power source comprises a battery, an electrical outlet, or both (Shi: 12, fig. 1, [0026] and [0027]. Karanikos: 124, fig. 1A).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
References: Hu et al. (US 2021/0288523); Satymoorthy et al. (US 10,283,997); Partovi (US 10,141,770) and Loewen (US 2017/0063142) are cited because they are related to wireless charger device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tuyen Kim Vo whose telephone number is (571)270-1657. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8AM-6:30PM.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/TUYEN K VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights