Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 18/594,439

ELECTRIC POWER CONTROL SYSTEM

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Mar 04, 2024
Priority
Jan 29, 2016 — JP 2016-015118 +2 more
Examiner
CHOWDHURI, SWARNA N
Art Unit
2836
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co., Ltd.
OA Round
6 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allowance Rate
278 granted / 363 resolved
+8.6% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
381
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
62.3%
+22.3% vs TC avg
§102
24.8%
-15.2% vs TC avg
§112
9.9%
-30.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 363 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2006/0214500 (Hall) in view of US 2011/0139530 (Ananthakrishna). Regarding claim 1, Hall teaches a vehicle [0087] comprising: a wheel (Fig. 1 shows wheel 10) comprising a rim portion (Fig. 1 shows rim 12), a disk portion (Fig. 1 shows central portion 11), and a battery (Fig. 7 shows battery 81 in a metal band around the rim); and a vehicle body (a vehicle having a vehicle body) [0087], wherein the disk portion includes a connector at a center of the disk portion (Fig. 8 shows wire 150 connected to the LED 42 and solar cell 30 via connector at a center of the disk portion) [0150], wherein the rim portion has an inside rim face and an outside rim face (Fig. 1 shows rim 12 having an inside rim face and an outside rim face), and wherein the battery includes a terminal provided at an end portion of the inside rim face (Fig. 7 shows battery 81 includes a terminal provided at an end portion of the inside rim 12 face), wherein the terminal is electrically connected to the connector through a cable (Fig. 7 shows terminal of battery electrically connected to the connector of LED 42 and solar cell 30 as shown in Fig. 8 via wire 150 as shown in detail in Fig. 10), and wherein the battery has a belt-like shape wrapped around a cylindrical portion of the rim portion (Fig. 7 shows battery 81 fixedly positioned on the outside rim face 12A wherein battery is encased in a metal band that extends around the circumference of the rim) [0136]. However, Hall does not teach the battery between the inside rim face and the outside rim face. However, Ananthakrishna teaches the battery between the inside rim face and the outside rim face (Fig. 5 shows belt of portable power pack being embedded in the rim 502 thereby being between the inside rim face and the outside rim face) [0027]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the battery between the inside rim face and the outside rim face as taught by Ananthakrishna in order to protect the battery from outside environmental conditions. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2006/0214500 (Hall) in view of US 2011/0139530 (Ananthakrishna) further in view of US 2015/0349158 (Kanemoto). Regarding claim 2, Hall teaches a vehicle [0087] comprising: a wheel (Fig. 1 shows wheel 10) comprising a rim portion (Fig. 1 shows rim 12), a disk portion (Fig. 1 shows central portion 11), and a battery (Fig. 7 shows battery 81 in a metal band around the rim); and a vehicle body (a vehicle having a vehicle body) [0087], wherein the disk portion includes a connector at a center of the disk portion (Fig. 8 shows wire 150 connected to the LED 42 and solar cell 30 via connector at a center of the disk portion) [0150], wherein the rim portion has an inside rim face and an outside rim face (Fig. 1 shows rim 12 having an inside rim face and an outside rim face), wherein the battery includes a terminal provided at an end portion of the inside rim face (Fig. 7 shows battery 81 includes a terminal provided at an end portion of the inside rim 12 face), wherein the terminal is electrically connected to the connector through a cable (Fig. 7 shows terminal of battery electrically connected to the connector of LED 42 and solar cell 30 as shown in Fig. 8 via wire 150 as shown in detail in Fig. 10), and wherein the battery has a belt-like shape wrapped around a cylindrical portion of the rim portion (Fig. 7 shows battery 81 fixedly positioned on the outside rim face 12A wherein battery is encased in a metal band that extends around the circumference of the rim) [0136]. However, Hall does not teach the battery between the inside rim face and the outside rim face. However, Ananthakrishna teaches the battery between the inside rim face and the outside rim face (Fig. 5 shows belt of portable power pack being embedded in the rim 502 thereby being between the inside rim face and the outside rim face) [0027]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the battery between the inside rim face and the outside rim face as taught by Ananthakrishna in order to protect the battery from outside environmental conditions. However, Hall and Ananthakrishna does not teach belt-like shaped battery wrapped more than one lap. However, Kanemoto teaches belt-like shaped battery wrapped more than one lap (Fig. 2 shows multiple layers of positive electrode plates 31 and negative electrode plates 32 thereby forming the structure where the battery is wrapped for more than one lap) [0053-0054]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have belt-like shaped battery wrapped more than one lap as taught by Kanemoto in order to increase the amount of battery present in the wheel rim thereby increasing the power capacity. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2006/0214500 (Hall) in view of US 2011/0139530 (Ananthakrishna) and US 2015/0349158 (Kanemoto) further in view of US 2017/0008385 (Fujimoto). Regarding claim 3, Hall, Ananthakrishna and Kanemoto does not teach further comprising an electric power transmission mechanism including a circuit and an antenna, wherein the circuit is electrically connected to the battery through the cable, and wherein the antenna is electrically connected to the circuit. However, Fujimoto teaches an electric power transmission mechanism including a circuit and an antenna, wherein the circuit is electrically connected to the battery through the cable, and wherein the antenna is electrically connected to the circuit [0036-0037]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an electric power transmission mechanism including a circuit and an antenna, wherein the circuit is electrically connected to the battery through a cable, and wherein the antenna is electrically connected to the circuit as taught by Fujimoto in order to ensure receiving and transmitting power wirelessly thereby bypassing the usage of wiring and saving space in the system. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 06/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding independent claims 1 and 3, the Applicant presents that the current references do not teach the amended portion as follows: wherein the disk portion includes a connector at a center of the disk portion, wherein the battery includes a terminal provided at an end portion of the inside rim face, wherein the terminal is electrically connected to the connector through a cable. However, the Examiner would like to point to the Hall reference, Fig. 8 shows wire 150 connected to the LED 42 and solar cell 30 via connector at a center of the disk portion to teach wherein the disk portion includes a connector at a center of the disk portion as indicated in paragraph [0150]. Furthermore, the Examiner would like to point to Fig. 7 of Hall that shows battery 81 include a terminal provided at an end portion of the inside rim 12 face, and said terminal of battery electrically connected to the connector of LED 42 and solar cell 30 as shown in Fig. 8 via wire 150 as shown in detail in Fig. 10, thereby teaching wherein the battery includes a terminal provided at an end portion of the inside rim face, wherein the terminal is electrically connected to the connector through a cable. Thereby, the rejection stands. 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 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 SWARNA N CHOWDHURI whose telephone number is (571)431-0696. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7496. 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. SWARNA N. CHOWDHURI Examiner Art Unit 2836 /S.N.C/Examiner, Art Unit 2836 /REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 6 earlier events
Jul 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Oct 24, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 14, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Feb 17, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 26, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Jun 17, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 09, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12749970
POWER SUPPLY CONTROL DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 7m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12744386
PORTABLE POWER STATION, SYSTEM, AND METHOD THEREOF
3y 2m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12744258
POWER TOOL AND DISCHARGING SYSTEM
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12738772
Power Capability Detection For Wireless Power Transmission Based On Receiver Power Request
2y 11m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12734933
BATTERY CONTROL APPARATUS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE
2y 2m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+19.1%)
3y 0m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 363 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month