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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed 8/31/23 has been considered and placed of record. The initialed copy is attached herewith.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the unlabeled rectangular boxes of circuit shown in figures 2, 9a and 9b should be provided with descriptive text labels. Although the boxes in the figures are numbered which allow a correlation to each box as one reads the specification, the numbers by themselves do not allow one to quickly ascertain the concept of the invention which is desirable during a later search of analogous art. The numbers should be complimented with words spelled out to facilitate future searches. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
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 1-14 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.
Re claim 1, the phrase “with a view to recharging” on line 2 is vague and confusing.
Re claims 2-5, they are indefinite for depending directly or indirectly on indefinite claim 1.
Re claim 6, the limitation “the bell” on the last line lacks proper antecedent basis. For examination purpose, it is assumed claim 6 depends on claim 3.
Re claims 7-14, they are indefinite for depending directly or indirectly on indefinite claims.
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.
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.
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 1, 2, 7-9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over French document FR3082060A1 in view of WO document WO2021105928A1. See machine translation.
Re claim 1, the French document discloses a device fittable on an electrical apparatus with a view to recharging the electrical apparatus (para 1), the device comprising: a storage comprising a cable bearing an electrical plug at an end of the cable, a movement assembly for setting the cable in motion, first mechanical actuating means for actuating the movement assembly, the first mechanical actuating means being configured to actuate the movement assembly with a view to releasing the cable outwardly from the storage unit or to retracting the cable into the storage unit; a storage casing in which the electrical plug is housed when the cable is retracted (para 2), the storage casing bearing an obturating device that comprises a cover that is actuatable to open or close; second mechanical actuating means controlled to open or close the cover; and control for controlling the first mechanical actuating means so as to release or retract the cable and for controlling the second mechanical actuating means so as to open or close the cover, the control means being configured to receive an electrical control signal from detecting means or a control unit. (bolded text is not found in the French document).
The French document does not disclose a cover and actuating means to control open/close the cover. The WO document discloses a vehicle charging device having a connection device with cable and a plug connector on its end. It further includes a cover to prevent dirt and debris from contacting the plug connector. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have included a cover as taught by the WO document into the connection device of the French document to inhibit external contaminant from coming into contact with the plug/connector. It is noted that none of the document disclose or teach the cover being controlled by a control unit to open and close its cover. Official notice is taken of the fact that having the cover controlled via control signal to open/close would allow for a remote operation. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the cover of the WO document with a controlled signal to open/close to permit remote operation by the vehicle or the user without having to physically manipulate the cover.
Re claim 2, both documents disclose a guiding device to guide the cable to the outside.
Re claim 7, the French document discloses a winder to wound the cable.
Re claims 8 and 9, both documents do not disclose a first sensor sensing the unwound cable state and a second sensor sensing the wound cable state. Official notice is taken of the fact that having sensors to sense both wound and unwound state of the cable would allow the motor to stop at the correct position. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have sensors to sense the wound/unwound states of the cable to prevent damage to the motor.
Re claim 11, the French document further discloses the plug and sockets are coupled together and the plug is on the device (para 1).
Re claim 12, the French document discloses a jacket and pedestal with a central part connected by the socket (figs 1 and 2a-2b).
Re claim 13, the French document further discloses a plural coils arranged in concentric circle and control means guilds plug via magnetic field. See para 2.
Re claim 14, the French document further discloses the chassis is fastened.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 and 10 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to the Examiner at the below-listed number. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu from 7:00am-5:00pm.
The Examiner’s SPE is Drew Dunn and he can be reached at 571.272.2312. The fax number for the organization where this application 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.
/EDWARD TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 571.272.2087
Prosecution Insights