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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-16, 19, 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Witelson (PGPub 20190284827).
Witelson teaches a pool cleaning robot (22, 24, 26, 28) that comprises: a housing (paragraph 0060); a power supply cable interface (figure 1, where 26 contacts 24) for interfacing with a power supply cable (26); wherein at least a part of the power supply cable is external to the housing (paragraph 0071); a power supply control unit (paragraph 0089), and a wireless charging interface (24, 222, 242; paragraph 0131, 0134); wherein the power supply control unit is configured to control (a) a provision of power from the power supply cable to the wireless charging interface (the power supply 28 supplies power to the wire charging interface 24 via cable 26); and (b) a provision of power from the wireless charging interface (24) to one or more power consuming elements of the pool cleaning robot (the wireless charging interface provides power to the robot via 224, 242).
With regards to claim 2, the wireless charging interface is configured to wirelessly charge (via 222/242) a rechargeable battery (505) via a battery wireless charging interface (paragraph 0107) when receiving the power from the power supply cable (figure 1; element 26).
With regards to claim 3, the wireless charging interface is further configured to provide power from the rechargeable battery; and wherein the power supply control unit is configured to control a provision of the power from the detachable rechargeable battery to the one or more power consuming elements of the pool cleaning robot (when the battery is charged, the battery provides power to the elements of the robot).
With regards to claim 4, the robot comprises the battery.
With regards to claim 5, the rechargeable battery further comprises an additional battery wireless charging interface (figure 9 and 11).
With regards to claim 6, the additional battery wireless charging interface faces away from the pool cleaning robot (figure 9 and 11).
With regards to claim 8, the battery is non-detachable (it does not have be detached from the housing).
With regards to claim 9, the power from the power supply cable is provided by a floating unit (24).
With regards to claim 10, the power from the power supply cable is provided by an external power supply (28).
With regards to claim 11, Witelson teaches a method for power control, the method comprises: receiving power (a) by a power supply cable interface (figure 1, where 26 contacts 24) of a pool cleaning, and (b) from a power supply cable (26) that has at least a part that is external to a housing of the pool cleaning robot (paragraph 0071); and controlling, by a power supply control unit (paragraph 0089) of the pool cleaning robot, (a) a provision of power from the power supply cable to a wireless charging interface (via cable 26) of the pool cleaning robot; and (b) a provision of power from the wireless charging interface to one or more power consuming elements of the pool cleaning robot (via 224, 242).
With regards to claim 12, the method comprises wirelessly charging, by the wireless charging interface (224 and 242), a rechargeable battery (505) via a battery wireless charging interface (paragraph 0107), when receiving the power from the power supply cable (26).
With regards to claim 13, providing power, by the wireless charging interface, from the rechargeable battery; and controlling, by the power supply control unit, a provision of the power from the detachable rechargeable battery to one or more power consuming elements of the pool cleaning robot (when the battery is charged, the battery provides power to the elements of the robot).
With regards to claim 14, the robot comprises the rechargeable battery.
With regards to claim 15, charging the battery, by an entity (24, 28) that is external to the pool cleaning robot, via an additional battery wireless charging interface (figure 9 and 11).
With regards to claim 16, the additional battery wireless charging interface faces away from the pool cleaning robot (figure 9 and 11).
With regards to claim 19, feeding the power supply cable by power from a floating unit (24).
With regards to claim 39, the power supply control unit is configured switch between (a) a first mode for the provision of power from the power supply cable to the wireless charging interface, and (b) a second mode for the provision of power from the wireless charging interface to the one or more power consuming elements of the pool cleaning robot (the power supply can switch from supplying power to the wireless charging unit to the wireless charging unit supplying power to the robot housing).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 7 and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Witelson (‘827).
Witelson teaches all the essential elements of the claimed invention including that the power supply cable interface is for interfacing with a power supply cable (46) for receiving power via a wired connection from the power supply cable (28 supplies power to 24 via cable 26); and the wireless charging interface (24) is configured to wirelessly charge a rechargeable battery (505) (claim 40). Witelson however fails to teach that the battery is detachably connected to the housing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Witelson so that the battery is detachable. This will allow for one battery to be charged while another battery is in use. Thus allowing the user to use the cleaning robot continuously without downtime for recharging.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Witelson (‘827) in view of Porat (USPN 20060223394)
Witelson teaches all the essential elements of the claimed invention however fails to teach that the power comes from a foldable solar panel. Porat teaches using a foldable solar panel (96; figure 6 and 7) to charge a robot pool cleaner. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the external power supply of Witelson with a foldable solar panel as taught by Porat to allow for using renewable and clean energy from the sun.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that Witelson fails to teach a power supply control unit within the pool cleaning robot. In response, the pool cleaning robot of Witelson includes the power supply, the floating charger and the robot itself. All three elements make up the pool cleaning robot. There is nothing in the claim that would lead one of skill in the art to require the power supply control unit to be within the housing of the robot. Further, Witelson teaches dual charging features by having a wired charge from the power supply to the floating charger and then wireless charging from the floating charger to the robot housing.
The applicant argues that claim 1 requires the power supply cable to interface with the robot itself. In response, the claim does not require that the cable needs to contact the robot itself. Instead, the cable only needs to contact the wireless charging interface as stated in part (a) of claim 1. Part (b) of the claim only requires a connection from the wireless charger to the robot housing.
With regards to new claim 39, it is clear that the power control unit will be “on” to supply power via the cable to the wireless charging interface charge and then it will be “off” when the wireless charger charges the robot housing, thus having a switch like effect.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAY LYNN KARLS whose telephone number is (571)272-1268. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th (6am-5pm).
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
/SHAY KARLS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights