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
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, 2, 16-18, 20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kageyama et al. (JP 2017070057 A).
Regarding independent claims 1, 16, and 20, and dependent claim 22, Kageyama teaches (Figs. 2 and 3) a power supply device comprising:
an electrical storage device (11);
a charging circuit (12) configured to
start charging of the electrical storage device based on input power (via 9) from a power system (16 and/or 20) of a vehicle (15), upon occurrence of a condition in which a voltage of the electrical storage device decreases to a first threshold ([0081]), and
stop the charging of the electrical storage device, upon occurrence of a condition in which the voltage of the electrical storage device increases to a second threshold, the second threshold being greater than the first threshold ([0020]);
a boost circuit (13) configured to step up the voltage of the electrical storage device ([0023]); and
a control circuit (21) configured to cause the boost circuit to perform a boost operation ([0022], [0023] and [0027]), such that, in a first operation mode (i.e. “second procedure”) and a second operation mode (i.e. “first procedure”), a boosted voltage that is higher than the voltage of the electrical storage device is supplied to a load device (17) ([0052]), and such that the boosted voltage is a constant (“stabilized”) voltage ([0024]), wherein:
in the first operation mode (the standby state; no collision operation), the control circuit is configured to receive an operation detection signal when vehicle equipment is operated (when the load is high and the battery 16 is not able to supply all of the load demand; i.e. when an A/C is turned on; [0042], [0043]), and start, in response to receiving the operation detection signal, the boost operation of the boost circuit using the electrical storage device as a power supply ([0047]-[0049]), and
in the second operation mode (during a detected collision aka abnormal state), the control circuit is configured to receive the operation detection signal when the vehicle equipment is operated, and start, in response to receiving the operation detection signal, the boost operation of the boost circuit using the electrical storage device as the power supply ([0023]), and
wherein the second operation mode corresponds to an abnormal state (detected collision), and the first operation mode is different (normal operation but low battery 16 due to high load demand) from the second operation mode ([0049] talks about the two different operation modes that both perform the boost operation).
Regarding claim 2, Kageyama teaches a power path with one end coupled to the power system (via 9) and the other end coupled to an output node (10) side of the boosted voltage (via NPSU, 18; Fig. 3; [0033]).
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Kageyama teaches a motorized device (vehicle) comprising:
the power supply device of claim 1; and
the load device (17), wherein the load device is a device configured to control an operation of vehicle equipment that is operated by a user ([0051], [0052]).
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.
Claim(s) 3-13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kageyama et al. (JP 2017070057 A) and Nakayama (2021/0009102). Kageyama teaches the power supply device as described above.
Regarding claim 3, Kageyama fails to explicitly teach the boost circuit being bidirectional and including the charging circuit. Nakayama teaches a similar power supply device (Fig. 1) to that of Kageyama. Nakayama teaches a power system (20), a load (90), an electrical storage device (32), charging/boost circuit (31), and a control circuit (10). Nakayama teaches their boost circuit (31) being a bidirectional buck-boost converter that includes the charging circuit ([0037]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Kageyama’s boost circuit being bidirectional and including the charging circuit to minimize the number of elements used in the system to reduce overall costs.
Regarding claim 4, the Kageyama/Nakayama combination teaches the control circuit being configured to cause the bidirectional buck-boost converter to perform a charging operation such that the electrical storage device is charged with power that is input from the output node through the power path (Kageyama at [0020]; and Nakayama teaches the input and output nodes being the same node and the power path being between 20 and 30).
Regarding claim 5, Kageyama teaches the control circuit (21) being configured to
cause the bidirectional buck-boost converter to perform the charging operation upon occurrence of the condition in which the voltage of the electrical storage device decreases to the first threshold ([0081]), and
stop the charging operation of the bidirectional buck-boost converter upon occurrence of the condition in which the voltage of the electrical storage device increases to the second threshold ([0020]).
Regarding claims 6, 9, Kageyama teaches the load device is a device configured to control an operation of vehicle equipment that is operated by a user, and
wherein the control circuit is configured to cause the bidirectional buck-boost converter to perform the boost operation (from a charge mode/operation), while the vehicle equipment is detected to be operating. ([0051], [0052])
Regarding claim 7, Kageyama teaches the control circuit is configured to stop the boost operation of the bidirectional buck-boost converter, in a case where the vehicle equipment is not operated. ([0026]; when a collision is not predicted and/or after a collision is averted after the predetermined connection time)
Regarding claim 8, Kageyama teaches the control circuit is configured to cause the bidirectional buck-boost converter to switch from a charge mode to a boost mode, upon occurrence of a condition in which an abnormality (i.e. collision being predicted) in the vehicle is detected. ([0020], [0023])
Regarding claim 10, Kageyama teaches the control circuit is configured to operate the boost circuit such that the boosted voltage is 13V ([0052]) and the voltage of the power path is provided by the battery (16; [0046]; i.e. ~13V). Kageyama fails to explicitly teach the boosted voltage being lower than a voltage of the power path. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the boosted voltage being lower (i.e. 12.6V) than a voltage of the power path (i.e. 13V), since the Applicant has not disclosed that having the boosted voltage being lower than a voltage of the power path solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with various output voltages (around 13V) being output from either path to power the load.
Regarding claim 11, Kageyama teaches the control circuit is configured to start, upon occurrence of a condition in which an abnormality in the vehicle is detected (i.e. collision is predicted), the boost operation of the boost circuit such that a current flows from the boost circuit into the load device. ([0023])
Regarding claims 12 and 13, Kageyama teaches the load device is a device configured to control an operation of vehicle equipment that is operated by a user ([0051], [0052]), and
wherein in a case where the control circuit causes the boost circuit to perform the boost operation such that a current flows from the boost circuit into the load device ([0051], [0052]), the control circuit is configured to
cause the boost circuit to switch from the boost operation to either an intermittent operation or a PFM operating mode, upon occurrence of a condition in which an abnormality in the vehicle is detected (Kageyama teaches intermittent operation based on the switch unit 23 at [0023] and [0026]).
Kageyama fails to explicitly teach operating the boost circuit in a PWM operating mode. However the Examiner takes Official Notice that operating a boost circuit in a PWM operating mode is known in the art to boost the input voltage to a boosted output voltage. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operate the boost circuit in a PWM operating mode to boost the voltage supplied to the load, upon occurrence of a condition in which the operation of the vehicle equipment is detected, since the Examiner takes Official Notice that operating a boost circuit in a PWM operating mode would allow for the voltage to be boosted as needed, as taught in the Kageyama reference, and it involves a mere simple substitution or design choice on how to operate the boost circuit to boost an input voltage to an output and using a PWM operating mode is known in the relevant art.
Regarding claim 19, Kageyama teaches the idea of the vehicle equipment (i.e. load 17) being any/all types of vehicle components ([0059]). Kageyama fails to explicitly teach the vehicle equipment being an opening-and-closing member. However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that opening-and-closing members, such as a door or window, are known types of vehicle components and are encompassed in Kageyama’s “vehicle components” that are being powered in their load (17). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have Kageyama’s vehicle equipment being an opening-and-closing member, since Kageyama teaches the general idea and the Examiner takes Official Notice that opening-and-closing members are known vehicle components.
Claim(s) 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kageyama et al. (JP 2017070057 A) and Kobayashi et al. (2009/0193273). Kageyama teaches the power supply device as described above.
Regarding claim 14, Kageyama fails to explicitly teach a regulator to generate a supply voltage to the control circuit. Kobayashi teaches a similar power supply device (Fig. 5) to that of Kageyama. Kobayashi teaches an electrical storage device (3), a control circuit (20), and a regulator (11). Kobayashi also teaches the regulator configured to generate a supply voltage to the control circuit, based on the power that is supplied by the electrical storage device ([0062]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a regulator into Kageyama’s invention to generate a supply voltage to the control circuit, based on the power supplied by either the power system or the electrical storage device, since Kobayashi teaches a way to power the control circuit and Kageyama was silent as to how their control circuit is powered and power is needed to power and allow the control circuit to function.
Regarding claim 15, Kageyama teaches the idea of a backflow prevention circuit unit (19; i.e. a diode) being implemented between a power source and the load ([0034]) to prevent power from flowing backwards into the power source. Neither Kageyama nor Kobayashi explicitly teach having a diode between the electrical storage device and the regulator. However, since Kageyama teaches the idea of using a diode to prevent power from flowing backwards into a power source, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement a diode between the electrical storage device and the regulator to prevent power from flowing backwards into the electrical storage device from the regulator to prevent undesirable power from flowing into the electrical storage device.
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kageyama et al. (JP 2017070057 A) and Ulinski et al. (6,700,802). Kageyama teaches the power supply device as described above. Kageyama also teaches the control circuit configured to cause the boost circuit to perform the boost operation regardless of whether a failure of the power system or an emergency state occurs ([0023]).
Kageyama fails to explicitly teach their buck charging circuit (12) and the boost circuit (13) comprising a singular bidirectional buck-boost converter. Ulinski teaches a similar vehicle power supply device (Fig. 1A) to that of Kageyama. Ulinski teaches a singular bidirectional buck-boost converter (106) used to charge and boost/discharge an electrical storage device (110). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a single bidirectional buck-boost converter into Kageyama’s invention for their buck charging circuit (12) and boost circuit (13), since it involves a mere simple substitution of some circuit element for others to perform the same function of buck-boost conversion of input power to and from an electrical storage device, and it would allow for fewer elements to be used in the system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 16, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Examiner believes that Kageyama teaches the amended limitations. As explained above in the rejection, Kageyama teaches the claimed first operation mode (i.e. “second procedure”, when the load demand is high which causes the battery 16 voltage to be low and boost operation is conducted to help supply power to the large load), and the second operation mode (i.e. “first procedure”, when a collision signal is detected aka an abnormal state).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DRU M PARRIES whose telephone number is (571)272-8542. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Thursday from 9:00am to 6:00pm. The examiner can also be reached on alternate Fridays.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Rexford Barnie, can be reached on 571-272-7492. 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).
DMP
7/27/2026
/DANIEL KESSIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights