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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action has been changed in response to the amendment filed on 5/13/2026.
Claim 1 has been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to the Applicant’s argument that “Shin does not disclose or suggest the presently claimed passthrough charging parameter that selectively controls whether the battery of the mobile phone cover is coupled to or decoupled from the charging interface while prioritizing charging of the mobile phone battery” (Page 4), the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Shin teaches “when the handheld device 410 of FIG. 4 is placed into the insertion device 420 of FIG. 7 or FIG. 8, and the user sets to charge the handheld device 410 through the interactive graphical user interface, the handheld device 410 can control the slave application circuit SAC to charge the battery of the handheld device 410 with the external power Power_IN, or charge the slave battery module SBM, or simultaneously charge the battery of the handheld device 410 and the slave battery module SBM” on Page 10 [0044]. Accordingly, the Examiner views this as the user sets the equivalent of the “passthrough charging parameter” through the user interface that results in coupling the charging interface to only the mobile phone battery, only the mobile phone cover battery or to both simultaneously.
Since the user in Shin is controlling which battery is charged first by the external power supply (i.e. A/C power), via the interactive interface and display of the mobile phone (Figs. 4-6), the Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s assertion.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Applicant did not amend these existing instances of language within claim 1. It is not clear to the Examiner which “a battery” is “the battery of the mobile phone”. Applicant states “a battery of a mobile phone cover”, “a battery disposed within the housing of the mobile phone cover”, “the battery” which presumably is referring back to the “battery of the mobile phone cover” and now “the battery of the mobile phone” and “the mobile phone battery”.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shin et al. (GB 2487095A, hereinafter, Shin) in view of Suomela (US-2014/017921).
Regarding claim 1, Shin teaches a mobile phone (Fig. 4 [410] and Pages 6-7 [0032]), comprising:
one or more processors (inherent to the handheld device and required for the “interactive application program”, see Fig. 4 [415], Page 6 [0032] and Pages 7-8 [0034]) configured to selectively couple a battery (Fig. 4 [SBM]) of a mobile phone cover (Fig. 4 [420/430]) to a charging interface (Fig. 4 [440]) according to a passthrough charging parameter; (Page 6 [0032] through Page 8 [0034] and Claims 1-3 i.e. the application thresholds (Fig. 5 [UL & LL]) are enacted by Fig. 4 [SAC] to start and stop providing power from the battery (Fig. 4 [SBM]) to the mobile terminal (Fig. 4 [410]) via the charging interface Fig. 4 [440])
a mobile phone cover a housing (Fig. 4 [420/430]) configured to removably attach to the mobile phone (Fig. 4 [410]); (Page 6 [0032])
a battery disposed within the housing of the mobile phone cover; (Fig. 4 [SBM])
a controller (Page 7 [0032] “The handheld device 410 has a control power of the slave application circuit SAC, and the handheld device 410 displays an interactive graphical user interface to guide the user to set the insertion device 420 to provide electricity for the handheld device 410, so as to prolong a utilization time of the handheld device 410.”, Pages 7-8 [0034] and Page 10 [0044]) configured to manage the charging of the battery of the mobile phone (Page 8 [0038] “"MASTER" and "BACKUP" indicated in FIG. 6 respectively represent the battery of the handheld device 410 and the slave battery module SBM”) by controlling the power transfer according to the charge level of the battery (Pages 7-8 [0033-0034] and Claims 1-3 i.e. the application thresholds (Fig. 5 [UL & LL]) are enacted by Fig. 4 [SAC] to start and stop providing power from the battery (Fig. 4 [SBM]) to the mobile terminal (Fig. 4 [410]) via the charging interface Fig. 4 [440]), wherein:
when the passthrough charging parameter is selected, the battery of the mobile phone is operably coupled to the charging interface and the battery of the mobile phone cover is decoupled form the charging interface, (Page 10 [0044] “when the handheld device 410 of FIG. 4 is placed into the insertion device 420 of FIG. 7 or FIG. 8, and the user sets to charge the handheld device 410 through the interactive graphical user interface, the handheld device 410 can control the slave application circuit SAC to charge the battery of the handheld device 410 with the external power Power_IN, or charge the slave battery module SBM” i.e. charge the phone battery and not the mobile phone cover battery),
when the passthrough charging parameter is deselected, the battery of the mobile phone is operably coupled to the charging interface and the battery of the mobile phone cover is operably coupled to the charging interface, (Page 10 [0044] “when the handheld device 410 of FIG. 4 is placed into the insertion device 420 of FIG. 7 or FIG. 8, and the user sets to charge the handheld device 410 through the interactive graphical user interface, the handheld device 410 can control the slave application circuit SAC to charge the battery of the handheld device 410 with the external power Power_IN, or charge the slave battery module SBM, or simultaneously charge the battery of the handheld device 410 and the slave battery module SBM”) and
wherein the passthrough charging parameter causes the mobile phone battery to charge prior to charging the battery of the mobile phone cover. (Page 10 [0044] “the user sets to charge the handheld device 410 through the interactive graphical user interface, the handheld device 410 can control the slave application circuit SAC to charge the battery of the handheld device 410 with the external power Power_IN, or charge the slave battery module SBM”)
Shin differs from the claimed invention by not explicitly reciting a wireless power receiver electrically coupled to the battery and a wireless power transmitter configured to transfer power from the battery to the mobile phone.
In an analogous art, Suomela teaches a method and apparatus for optimized device to device charging (Abstract) that includes a mobile phone (Fig. 2D [10]) that comprises a wireless power receiver (Fig. 2D [26”, 150’” and 152”] or Fig. 2D [26, 150 & 152] i.e. both mapped due to clarity issues as explained above in sections 7-11) electrically coupled to the battery; (Fig. 2D [102] and Page 9 [0163] i.e. both devices have batteries)
a wireless power transmitter (Fig. 2D [100 & 100”]) configured to transfer power from the battery to the mobile phone; (Page 11 [0183])
and a controller configured to manage the charging via the wireless power transmitter according to the charge level of the battery. (Page 11 [0185])
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to be motivated to implement the invention of Shin after modifying it to incorporate the ability to utilize a wireless power transfer of Suomela since it enables charging without being plugged into an AC power source and requiring the correct cable for the charging interface. (Suomela Page 7 [0144-0148])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-2019/0341957 to Coverstone which discloses a mobile device cover for use with a host mobile device
US-2019/0341958 to Coverstone which discloses a mobile device cover for use with a host mobile device
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 MATTHEW C SAMS whose telephone number is (571)272-8099. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5 EST.
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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at (571)272-4177. 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.
/Matthew C Sams/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights