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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 3 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/017, 083.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
App# 18/579, 502 App#18/017,083
Claim 1. A wireless power transfer system to supply electric power without contact to a car moving in a hoistway of an elevator,
the wireless power transfer system comprising: a plurality of power transmitters disposed in the hoistway so as to be aligned over multiple floors in a moving direction of the car; a power transmitting device to supply electric power to the plurality of power transmitters;
a power receiver to receive electric power from the plurality of power transmitters without contact, the power receiver being installed on the car; a power receiving device to receive electric power from the power receiver; a load device to which the electric power received by the power receiving device is supplied; and a controller to control the power transmitting device and the power receiving device, wherein a dimension of the power receiver in the moving direction of the car is larger than a dimension of each of the plurality of power transmitters in the moving direction of the car, wherein intervals of the plurality of power transmitters in the moving direction of the car are smaller than the dimension of the power receiver in the moving direction of the car and lamer than the dimension of each of the plurality of power transmitters in the moving direction of the car.
1. A wireless power supply system that supplies power on a power supply floor, in a contactless manner, to a car moving in a hoistway of an elevator,
the wireless power supply system comprising:
a power transmission unit that is provided on a side of the hoistway to supply the power in the contactless manner;
a power reception unit that is provided on a side of the car to receive the power, in the contactless manner, supplied from the power transmission unit; a controller to control the power transmission unit and the power reception unit; and a power storage to store the power received by the power reception unit and supply the power to a load transmission unit includes a plurality of power transmission coils provided along the hoistway and at least one power transmitter that supplies the power to each of the plurality of power transmission coils, the power reception unit includes a plurality of power reception coils provided on a surface of the car opposite to the power transmission coil and at least one power receiver that receives the power from each of the power reception coils, the plurality of power transmission coils include at least a first power transmission coil and a second power transmission coil, and a length of the second power transmission coil in a traveling direction of the car is longer than a length of the first power transmission coil.
Further Regarding claim 1, 083’ dies not disclose explicitly, wherein a dimension of the power receiver in the moving direction of the car is larger than a dimension of each of the plurality of power transmitters in the moving direction of the car, wherein intervals of the plurality of power transmitters in the moving direction of the car are smaller than the dimension of the power receiver in the moving direction of the car and lamer than the dimension of each of the plurality of power transmitters in the moving direction of the car.
. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to choose appropriate dimensions of transmission coils and also to choose a distance between the transmitter/receiver coils in 083’ apparatus in order to enhance power transmission for efficient charging of the battery or operating of a load, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
As to claim 3, 083’ discloses in claim 1, wherein the plurality of power transmitters are arranged to be equally spaced in line with the moving direction of the car [see claim 1].
Claims 11 and 12 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/017, 083 in view of Kanno (US 2019/0036370).
As to claim 11, 083’ discloses all of the claim limitations except, wherein the power receiver comprises a flat portion provided to face the power transmitters and a protruding portion protruding from the flat portion toward the power transmitters.
Kanno discloses in figure 4, wherein the power receiver [power receiver 220] comprises a flat portion provided to face the power transmitters and a protruding portion protruding from the flat portion toward the power transmitters [noted that the power receiver (220) is protruded from the flat surface (200)].
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to design the power receiver element of 083’ on the surface of the load as taught by Kanno to face the primary power transmitter to increase power transfer between the transmitter and receiver.
As to claim 12, Kanno discloses in figures 1-4, wherein the controller controls operation of the load device such that [see ¶0125, ¶0127, when one of the plurality of power transmitters faces the power receiver, electric power consumption of the load device is different in accordance with a relative position of the one power transmitter with respect to the power receiver [noted that the controller control the load to maintain high power transmission efficiency. It is also implicit that a power consumption of any load during wireless power transmission is dependent upon a relative position of a transmitter and receiver].
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because, all the elements are mentioned explicitly or implicitly.
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.
Claims 1.3 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kanno (US 2019/0036370).
As to claim 1, Kanno discloses in figure 4, a wireless power transfer system to supply electric power without contact to a car moving in a hoistway of an elevator [see figure 4] , the wireless power transfer system comprising:
a plurality of power transmitters [figures 1c and figure 4, element (120)] disposed in the hoistway [hoistway machine (12); see also ¶0052] so as to be aligned over multiple floors [ Np- th floors; see figure 4 and see ¶0050, ¶0072] in a moving direction of the car [the carridge (11) serves as a car];
a power transmitting device [ element (110); ¶0068] to supply electric power to the plurality of power transmitters [power transmitters (120a); and a power receiver [receiver circuit (220)] receive electric power from the plurality of power transmitters without contact, the power receiver being installed on the car [see ¶0068];
a power receiving device [element 210] to receive electric power from the power receiver;
a load device [battery load (24)] to which the electric power received by the power receiving device is supplied [¶0070]; and
a controller [controller 150; see figure 1c] to control the power transmitting device and the power receiving device [see ¶0068, 025-0127],
Kanno discloses and shows a distance between the receivers and transmitters and the distance between receivers are about 10mm [see ¶0137].
However, Kanno does not disclose explicitly, not disclose explicitly, wherein a dimension of the power receiver in the moving direction of the car is larger than a dimension of each of the plurality of power transmitters in the moving direction of the car, wherein intervals of the plurality of power transmitters in the moving direction of the car are smaller than the dimension of the power receiver in the moving direction of the car and lamer than the dimension of each of the plurality of power transmitters in the moving direction of the car.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to choose appropriate dimensions of transmission coils and also to choose a distance between the transmitter/receiver coils in 083’ apparatus in order to enhance power transmission for efficient charging of the battery or operating of a load, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
It is also noted that all the claimed elements of applicant’s inventions were known in the prior art (e.g. elevator car, plurality of power transmitters space apart, plurality of power receivers, and etc] , voltage gradient calculator, battery life judging means etc.,) and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, proper motivation/rationale to combine is as given in the office action. See KSR, 127 S. Ct. at 1740, 82 USPQ2d at 1396.
As to claim 3, Kanno discloses in figure 1, wherein the plurality of power transmitters are arranged to be equally spaced in line with the moving direction of the car [see figure 4].
As to claim 11, Kanno discloses in figure 4, wherein the power receiver [power receiver 220] comprises a flat portion provided to face the power transmitters and a protruding portion protruding from the flat portion toward the power transmitters [noted that the power receiver (220) is protruded from the flat surface (200)]..
As to claim 12, Kanno discloses in figures 1-4, wherein the controller controls operation of the load device such that [see ¶0125, ¶0127, when one of the plurality of power transmitters faces the power receiver, electric power consumption of the load device is different in accordance with a relative position of the one power transmitter with respect to the power receiver [noted that the controller control the load to maintain high power transmission efficiency. It is also implicit that a power consumption of any load during wireless power transmission is dependent upon a relative position of a transmitter and receiver].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-10 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.
For Claim 4: primarily, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest in the claimed combination: wherein the controller controls the operation of the load device such that the transmittable electric power from at least one of the power transmitters facing the power receiver to the power receiver does not fall below required electric power of the load device the required electric power being electric power required for stable operation of the load device.
.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL BERHANU whose telephone number is (571)272-8430. The examiner can normally be reached M_F.
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, Julian A. Huffman can be reached at Julian.Huffman@uspto.gov. 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.
/SAMUEL BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights