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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to application 18/588,049 filed 2/27/24. Claims 1-12 are pending with claim 1 in independent form.
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) 1-2 and 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamasaki et al. US 2020/0139821 A1.
Yamasaki teaches:
Re: claim 1, A power supply apparatus (power supply device 1) for supplying electric power to at least any of a plurality of pieces of equipment (auxiliary machine 6) installed in a vehicle (vehicle [0012]), the apparatus comprising: an output terminal that supplies electric power (positive electrode terminal PT electrically connected to main circuit (12 V system)), supplied from at least any of a plurality of power storage devices (first storage battery BT1 and second storage battery BT2) installed in the vehicle, to at least any of the plurality of pieces of equipment ([0017]); and a switching part (switch 5; first switch SW1, second switch SW2) that switches whether respective connection terminals of the plurality of power storage devices are i) connected to one or more of connection terminals of other power storage devices among the plurality of power storage devices, ii) connected to the output terminals, or iii) not connected to any of terminals of the other power storage devices and the output terminals ([0024]-[0026]); and a switching controller (switch control circuits 14 and 15) that controls the switching part to cause the output terminal to output electric power supplied from at least any of the plurality of power storage devices ([0026]).
Re: claim 2, The power supply apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a detection part that detects a failed power storage device from among the plurality of power storage devices, wherein the switching controller controls the switching part so that a power storage device whose failure is detected by the detection part is connected neither to the connection terminal of the other power storage device among the plurality of power storage devices nor to the output terminal ([0048]).
Re: claim 4, The power supply apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the switching controller controls the switching part to control whether at least two power storage devices of the plurality of power storage devices are connected in series or in parallel ([0023]-[0024], [0058], [0063]-[0064]).
Re: claim 5, The power supply apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the switching controller controls the switching part to control whether electric power to be outputted from at least two power storage devices among the plurality of power storage devices is outputted as electric power from one system or two systems ([0026]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamasaki et al. US 2020/0139821 A1 in view of Okamura et al. US 2019/0089169 A1.
The teachings of Yamasaki have been discussed above.
Yamasaki fails to specifically teach:
Re: claim 3, The power supply apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the switching controller controls the switching part to cause the output terminal to output electric power at any of a plurality of output voltages set in advance.
However, Okamura teaches:
Re: claim 3, The power supply apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the switching controller controls the switching part to cause the output terminal to output electric power at any of a plurality of output voltages set in advance ([0074]-[0075]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Okamura into the power supply of Yamasaki as an obvious matter of design choice to provide sufficient power efficiency dependent upon the type of load applied to the power storage unit ([0075]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-12 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art, in conjunction with all the other limitations of the claims: With respect to claim 6 and all its dependencies, a storage that stores connection management information that associates connection status information, corresponding to each of the plurality of output voltages, indicating statuses of connections of respective connection terminals of the plurality of power storage devices to one or more of connection terminals of other power storage devices or the output terminals and combination information indicating a combination of states of the switching part, wherein the switching controller controls a state of the switching part in accordance with a combination of states of the switching part indicated by the combination information stored in the storage in association with a connection status corresponding to any of the plurality of output voltages to cause at least two output terminals of the output terminals to output electric power supplied from at least any of the plurality of power storage devices, when combined with all the other limitations of the claim and claims 1 and 3 from which it depends. With respect to claim 7 and all its dependencies, a status identification part that identifies an operation status of the vehicle, wherein the switching controller controls the switching part such that electric power at an output voltage corresponding to the operation status of the vehicle identified by the status identification part is outputted from the output terminal, when combined with all the other limitations of the claims and claims 1 and 3 from which it depends. With respect to claim 10 and all its dependencies, a status identification part that identifies an operation status of the vehicle; and a storage that stores an operation status of the vehicle and information indicating statuses of connections of respective connection terminals of the plurality of power storage devices corresponding to the operation status to the connection terminal of the other power storage devices or the output terminals in association with each other, wherein the switching controller references the storage, identifies the connection status associated with the operation status identified by the status identification part, and controls the switching part on the basis of information indicating the identified connection status, when combined with all the other limitations of the claim and claim 1 from which it depends. The prior art of record fails to provide sufficient teaching or motivation to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the additionally recited features of these claims in the combinations as claimed.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTY A HAUPT whose telephone number is (571)272-8545 and email address is kristy.haupt@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Sun 5:30 AM- 10PM; Flex during day.
If all attempts to reach the examiner by telephone and email are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Pham, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-3689. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/KRISTY A HAUPT/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
KAH
Prosecution Insights