CTNF 18/512,417 CTNF 92041 DETAILED ACTION 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Austin (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0148789) (hereinafter “Austin”) in view of Fong et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 10,906,414) (hereinafter “Fong”) . Regarding claim 1, Austin teaches a charge system for restarting an AC charging session, (Para. 54 - - AC charging system is used; Para. 94 - - charging can resume, i.e. restart) the charge system comprising: a controller, the controller configured to: receive a first input identifying a charge session interruption; (Para. 105 - - interruption is identified and received) receive a second input identifying an available state-of-charge of a battery; (Fig. 6-9, 12 - - state of charge is received) compare the available state-of-charge of the battery with a predetermined threshold; (Para. 99 - - battery is charged until minimum threshold, i.e. predetermined threshold, is reached, i.e. state of charge is compared to threshold to insure minimum state of charge) and transmit a first output to command…the charge session when the available state-of-charge of the battery is less than the predetermined threshold. (Para. 94 - - charging can resume after interruption based on battery state of charge; Para. 99 - - battery is charged until minimum threshold, i.e. predetermined threshold, is reached) But Austin does not explicitly teach a first attempt to restart the charge session However, Fong teaches a first attempt to restart the charge session (Fig. 4 - - attempt is made to restart charging session) Austin and Fong are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain overlapping structural and/or functional similarities. They both contain controlling the charging of electric vehicles. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above limitation(s) as taught by Austin , by incorporating the above limitation(s) as taught by Fong . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to restart charging without the need to unplug, as suggested by Fong (Col. 1 Lines 45-55). Regarding claim 2, Austin teaches wherein the controller is configured to continuously receive the second input identifying the available state-of-charge of the battery. (Fig. 6-9, 12 - - state of charge is received) Regarding claim 3, Fong teaches wherein, when a first attempt to restart the charge session fails, the controller is configured to allow a calibratable amount of time to lapse before transmitting a second output to initiate a second attempt to restart the charge session. (Fig. 4 - - charging is attempted again, i.e. at least a second time, if the restart is not successful, i.e. fails, where checking is performed before next restart attempt which allows a calibratable amount of time to lapse) One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to restart charging without the need to unplug, as suggested by Fong (Col. 1 Lines 45-55). Regarding claim 4, Austin teaches wherein the controller is configured to feed a hardcoded false output to an interface parameter for the calibratable amount of time to inhibit controller shutdown. (Para. 150 - - acceptable error inhibits controller shutdown, where the error, i.e. false output, is acceptable, i.e. controller shutdown is inhibited, and where interface includes calibratable parameters) Regarding claim 5, Austin teaches wherein, when the second attempt to restart the charge session fails, the charge system is configured to allow shutdown of the controller. (Para. 94 - - charging can resume, i.e. restart, after interruption based on battery state of charge) Regarding claim 6, Austin teaches a charger having a locked position and an unlocked position, wherein the charger is in the locked position when the controller transmits the first output. (Para. 50 - - connection/coupling is used for charger) Regarding claim 7, Austin teaches wherein the charge system is configured to operate with one or more fuel cell electric vehicles. (Fig. 2-4 - - electric vehicles are used) Regarding claim 8, Austin teaches a charge system for mitigating low voltage battery depletion, (Para. 94 - - charging can resume, i.e. restart, after interruption based on battery state of charge) the charge system comprising: a powertrain controller, the powertrain controller configured (Para. 62 - - controller is used) to: receive a first input identifying a charge session termination; (Para. 105 - - interruption is identified and received) receive a second input identifying an available state-of-charge of a battery; (Fig. 6-9, 12 - - state of charge is received) compare the available state-of-charge of the battery with a predetermined threshold; and when the available state-of-charge of the battery is higher than the predetermined threshold, (Para. 99 - - battery is charged until minimum threshold, i.e. predetermined threshold, is reached, i.e. state of charge is compared to threshold to insure minimum state of charge) transmit a first output commanding a charge controller…to inhibit shutdown of the powertrain controller. (Para. 94 - - charging can resume after interruption based on battery state of charge; Para. 150 - - acceptable error inhibits controller shutdown, where the error, i.e. false output, is acceptable, i.e. controller shutdown is inhibited, and where interface includes calibratable parameters) But Austin does not explicitly teach to retain an auxiliary keyswitch input to inhibit shutdown However, Fong teaches to retain an auxiliary keyswitch input (Fig. 4 - - attempt is made to restart charging session, where attempt retains input to inhibit shutdown, i.e. attempting again without shutting down; Col. 6 Lines 9-18 - - switching is controlled, i.e. switch input) Austin and Fong are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain overlapping structural and/or functional similarities. They both contain controlling the charging of electric vehicles. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above limitation(s) as taught by Austin , by incorporating the above limitation(s) as taught by Fong . One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do this modification in order to restart charging without the need to unplug, as suggested by Fong (Col. 1 Lines 45-55). Regarding claim 9, Austin teaches wherein the powertrain controller is configured to transmit a second output commanding contactors of the battery to remain closed. (Para. 50 - - connection/coupling is used for charger) Regarding claim 10, Austin teaches wherein the powertrain controller is configured to transmit a third output commanding a DC-DC converter to regulate a voltage of a low voltage battery at a predetermined setpoint. (Para. 137 - - DC to DC converters are used) Regarding claim 11, Austin teaches wherein the powertrain controller is configured to continuously receive the first input identifying the available state-of-charge of the battery. (Fig. 6-9, 12 - - state of charge is received) Regarding claim 12, Austin teaches wherein the powertrain controller is configured to identify an event in which the available state-of-charge of the battery is depleted beneath the predetermined threshold. (Para. 94 - - charging can resume, i.e. restart, after interruption based on battery state of charge) Regarding claim 13, Austin teaches wherein the powertrain controller is configured to transmit a fourth output to attempt to restart the charge session when the available state- of-charge of the battery is less than the predetermined threshold. (Para. 94 - - charging can resume, i.e. restart, after interruption based on battery state of charge) Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(+++) as being anticipated by Austin . Regarding claim 14, Austin teaches a charge system for tracking metrics of a charging session, the charge system comprising: a controller; and a memory; (Para. 76 - - charge session is monitored, i.e. tracking metrics of charging session; Para. 8-9, 62 - - controller with memory is used) wherein the controller is configured to: receive a first input identifying a failure of a charging session; (Para. 105 - - interruption/failure is identified and received) execute a stateflow to identify a reason for the failure of the charging session; (Para. 105 - - failure status is communicated to a user, where failure status may include reason/cause of failure in order to enable user to find another source) and record the reason for the failure of the charging session in the memory with plain text. (Para. 105 - - failure reason is communicated to user, i.e. record reason for the failure) Regarding claim 15, Austin teaches wherein the failure of the charging session is a result of an unexpected termination of the charging session. (Para. 105 - - interruption is identified and received) Regarding claim 16, Austin teaches wherein the controller is configured to further identify at least one of : a charging session type, a charging session number, a duration of an active charging session, a net state-of-charge change, a duration of active charge, a measurement of net energy delivered into high voltage batteries, a duration of connection to a charger, a duration of delay of the charging session, and a duration of discharge. (Para. 105 - - interruption is identified) Regarding claim 17, Austin teaches wherein the controller is configured to identify ten metrics of the charging session. (Fig. 6-9, 12 - - state of charge is received) Regarding claim 18, Austin teaches wherein the controller is configured to record the metrics in an array. (Para. 96 - - metrics are recorded) Regarding claim 19, Austin teaches a user interface configured to access the memory and display the plain text. (Para. 178, Claim 6 - - user interface is used to display) Regarding claim 20, Austin teaches wherein the user interface is configured to display the plain text for a plurality of vehicles. (Para. 178, Claim 6 - - user interface is used to display) It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Saad M. Kabir whose telephone number is 571-270-0608 (direct fax number is 571-270-9933). The examiner can normally be reached on Mondays to Fridays 9am to 5pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mohammad Ali can be reached on 571-272-4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /SAAD M KABIR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2119 /MOHAMMAD ALI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2119 Application/Control Number: 18/512,417 Page 2 Art Unit: 2119 Application/Control Number: 18/512,417 Page 3 Art Unit: 2119 Application/Control Number: 18/512,417 Page 4 Art Unit: 2119 Application/Control Number: 18/512,417 Page 5 Art Unit: 2119 Application/Control Number: 18/512,417 Page 6 Art Unit: 2119 Application/Control Number: 18/512,417 Page 7 Art Unit: 2119 Application/Control Number: 18/512,417 Page 8 Art Unit: 2119 Application/Control Number: 18/512,417 Page 9 Art Unit: 2119
Prosecution Insights