CTNF 18/612,904 CTNF 89948 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Election/Restrictions 08-25 AIA Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 4/1/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claims utilize the transition phrase “comprising” and therefore claims directed towards two functions necessarily encompass embodiments having three or more functions . This is not found persuasive because the claims directed towards the alternative embodiment requiring three or more functions are no long present, but rather said claims have been amended to provide a singular embodiment. Therefore the arguments are considered moot, and the claims will be examined as filed . The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 31, which depend upon claim 1 recites a second iteration of “a magnetic state space”. The examiner will interpret said limitation as “the magnetic state space” to ensure proper antecedent basis remains throughout the claims . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 35-36, and 46-47 are 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. The claims recite wherein the distance is an L1 distance and wherein the distance is an L2 distance. However, it is unclear what the scope of the claim is. Paragraphs 0005 and 0011 of the Specification discloses the distance can be an L1 distance or an L2 distance but does not define what either L1 or L2 is. For the purpose of examination, the claim is read as distance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-3, 16-18, 31-36, 41-47, and 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Kwon et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0343765) . Regarding Claim 1: Kwon et al. discloses a wireless power transmitter (Fig. 3, wireless transmitter as shown) comprising: wireless power transmitting circuitry (Fig. 3, circuitry as shown) having a wireless power transmitting coil that transmits wireless power signals (Fig. 3, transmission coil 332 and its related discussion) ; and control circuitry coupled to the wireless power transmitting circuitry (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350, and their related discussion) that: measures a present value of a first function of quality factor (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring quality factor, such as Q1, frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0175, 0212, etc.) and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0175, etc.) and a present value of a second function of quality factor (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring quality factor, such as Q2, frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0175, 0212, etc.) and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0175, etc.) while the wireless power transmitter is coupled to a wireless power receiver (see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0175-0176, 0212, etc. Furthermore, the examiner notes that the “while” language refers to an event and is not interpreted as affecting the underlying structure of the control circuitry. The respective control circuitry of Kwon has the same structure during all times, including when a receiver is coupled or not. “While” can also refer to coincidental events, not causal. The claim does not explicitly set forth that the control circuitry definitely knows that coupling exists and only then takes the claimed action in response. Furthermore, the claim does not measure the quality factor but rather measures “the function” of it. The claim and the Spec do not define what the function of the quality factor is and thus is considered a broad and open-ended limitation) ; determines a change between the measured present values and corresponding baseline values of the first and second functions of quality factor and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil (see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0212, etc. the baseline values are both the threshold for the Q factor and the threshold set for the frequency) ; determines a z-axis separation distance between the wireless power transmitter and the wireless power receiver (distance, such as height, between the power transmitter and power receiver as discussed within paragraph 0404 for example) responsive to the change between the measured present values and corresponding baseline values of the first and second functions of quality factor and resonant frequency exceeding a threshold in a magnetic state space (Fig. 7 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0212, 0404, etc. The baseline values are both the threshold for the Q factor and the threshold set for the frequency) . Regarding Claim 2: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Kwon further discloses wherein the z-axis separation distance includes the presence of a case or cover on the wireless power receiver (distance, such as height, between the power transmitter and power receiver as discussed within paragraph 0404 for example. The examiner notes the phrase, “includes the presence of a case or cover” does not positively recite a case or cover as a claim limitation requiring separate detection or measurement. The claimed distance is still the separation between the transmitter and receiver, irrespective of any intervening material. Therefore, the height difference/z-axis separation distance determined by Kwon reads on the claimed distance, as any case or cover would merely be encompassed within that separation) . Regarding Claim 3: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Kwon further discloses wherein: the first function of quality factor and resonant frequency is quality factor (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring quality factor, such as Q1, frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0175, 0212, etc.) ; the second function of quality factor and resonant frequency is resonant frequency (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring quality factor, such as Q2, frequency value , etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0175, 0212, etc.) ; and the threshold comprises multiple linear thresholds (Fig. 7, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0212, etc.) . Regarding Claim 16: Kwon et al. discloses a method of operating a wireless power transmitter (Fig. 3, wireless transmitter as shown) having wireless power transmitting circuitry (Fig. 3, circuitry as shown) that includes a wireless power transmitting coil configured to transmit wireless power signals (Fig. 3, transmission coil 332 and its related discussion) and control circuitry coupled to the wireless power transmitting circuitry (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350, and their related discussion) , the method being performed by the control circuitry and comprising: measuring a present value of a first function of quality factor (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring quality factor, such as Q1, frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0175, 0212, etc.) and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0175, etc.) and a present value of a second function of quality factor (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring quality factor, such as Q2, frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0175, 0212, etc.) and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0175, etc.) while the wireless power transmitter is coupled to a wireless power receiver (see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0175-0176, 0212, etc. Furthermore, the examiner notes that the “while” language refers to an event and is not interpreted as affecting the underlying structure of the control circuitry. The respective control circuitry of Kwon has the same structure during all times, including when a receiver is coupled or not. “While” can also refer to coincidental events, not causal. The claim does not explicitly set forth that the control circuitry definitely knows that coupling exists and only then takes the claimed action in response. Furthermore, the claim does not measure the quality factor but rather measures “the function” of it. The claim and the Spec do not define what the function of the quality factor is and thus is considered a broad and open-ended limitation) ; comparing the measured present values of the first and second functions of quality factor and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil to corresponding baseline values (see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0212, etc. the baseline values are both the threshold for the Q factor and the threshold set for the frequency) ; and determining a z-axis separation distance between the wireless power transmitter and the wireless power receiver (distance, such as height, between the power transmitter and power receiver as discussed within paragraph 0404 for example) based at least partly on the comparison of the measured present values of the first and second functions of quality factor resonant frequency to the corresponding baseline values (Fig. 7 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0212, 0404, etc. The baseline values are both the threshold for the Q factor and the threshold set for the frequency) . Regarding Claim 17: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 16. Kwon further discloses wherein the z-axis separation distance includes the presence of a case or cover on the wireless power receiver (distance, such as height, between the power transmitter and power receiver as discussed within paragraph 0404 for example. The examiner notes the phrase, “includes the presence of a case or cover” does not positively recite a case or cover as a claim limitation requiring separate detection or measurement. The claimed distance is still the separation between the transmitter and receiver, irrespective of any intervening material. Therefore, the height difference/z-axis separation distance determined by Kwon reads on the claimed distance, as any case or cover would merely be encompassed within that separation) . Regarding Claim 18: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 16. Kwon further discloses wherein: the first function of quality factor and resonant frequency is quality factor (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring quality factor, such as Q1, frequency value, etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0175, 0212, etc.) ; and the second function of quality factor and resonant frequency is resonant frequency (Fig. 3, controller 380 with sensor 350 for measuring quality factor, such as Q2, frequency value , etc. and their related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0175, 0212, etc.) . Regarding Claim 31: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 1. Kwon further discloses wherein: the control circuitry determines a change between the measured present values and corresponding baseline values of the first and second functions of quality factor and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil by determining a distance between the measured present values and a curve fit to the corresponding baseline values in the magnetic space (Fig. 7 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0212, 0404, etc. The baseline values are both the threshold for the Q factor and the threshold set for the frequency) . Regarding Claim 32: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 31. Kwon further discloses wherein the z-axis separation distance includes the presence of a case or cover on the wireless power receiver (distance, such as height, between the power transmitter and power receiver as discussed within paragraph 0404 for example. The examiner notes the phrase, “includes the presence of a case or cover” does not positively recite a case or cover as a claim limitation requiring separate detection or measurement. The claimed distance is still the separation between the transmitter and receiver, irrespective of any intervening material. Therefore, the height difference/z-axis separation distance determined by Kwon reads on the claimed distance, as any case or cover would merely be encompassed within that separation) . Regarding Claim 33: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 31. Kwon further discloses wherein the first and second functions of quality factor and resonant frequency are selected to provided a linear curve fit in the magnetic state space (Fig. 7 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0210-0219, etc.) . Regarding Claim 34: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 31. Kwon further discloses wherein the first function of quality factor and resonant frequency is the inverse of resonant frequency times quality factor (the claim is a resultant of the resonant frequency squared) . Regarding Claims 35 and 36: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 31. Kwon further discloses wherein the distance is an L1 distance/L2 distance (distance, such as height, between the power transmitter and power receiver as discussed within paragraph 0404 for example. See the respective 112 rejection raised above) . Regarding Claim 41: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 31. Kwon further discloses wherein the control circuitry determines the distance between the measured present values of the first and second functions of quality factor and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil using scale factors based on a particular transmitter receiver pairing (the references scale factor is 1) . Regarding Claim 42: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 16. Kwon further discloses wherein: comparing the measured present values of the first and second functions of quality factor and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil to corresponding baseline values further comprises determining a distance between the measured present values of the first and second functions of quality factor and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil to a curve fit to the corresponding baseline values in a magnetic state space (Fig. 7 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0047, 0065, 0212, 0404, etc. The baseline values are both the threshold for the Q factor and the threshold set for the frequency) . Regarding Claim 43: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 42. Kwon further discloses wherein the z-axis separation distance includes the presence of a case or cover on the wireless power receiver (distance, such as height, between the power transmitter and power receiver as discussed within paragraph 0404 for example. The examiner notes the phrase, “includes the presence of a case or cover” does not positively recite a case or cover as a claim limitation requiring separate detection or measurement. The claimed distance is still the separation between the transmitter and receiver, irrespective of any intervening material. Therefore, the height difference/z-axis separation distance determined by Kwon reads on the claimed distance, as any case or cover would merely be encompassed within that separation) . Regarding Claim 44: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 42. Kwon further discloses wherein the first and second functions of quality factor and resonant frequency are selected to provide a linear curve fit in the magnetic state space Fig. 7 and its related discussion; see, at least, paragraphs 0210-0219, etc.) . Regarding Claim 45: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 44. Kwon further discloses wherein the first function of quality factor and resonant frequency is the inverse of resonant frequency times quality factor (the claim is a resultant of the resonant frequency squared) . Regarding Claims 46 and 47: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 42. Kwon further discloses wherein the distance is an L1 distance/L2 distance (distance, such as height, between the power transmitter and power receiver as discussed within paragraph 0404 for example. See the respective 112 rejection raised above) . Regarding Claim 52: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claim 42. Kwon further discloses scaling the corresponding baseline values using scale factors based on a particular transmitter receiving pairing (the references scale factor is 1) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 37 and 49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0343765) in view of Garcia Briz (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2015/0364944) . Regarding Claims 37 and 49: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claims 31 and 42, respectively. Kwon does not disclose wherein the control circuitry transfers power at a level below a maximum power level in response to detecting the z-axis separation distance exceeding the threshold or the presence of a case. However, Garcia Briz discloses transferring power at a level below a maximum power level in response to exceeding a respective threshold (see, at least, paragraph 0064) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transfer power at a level below a maximum power level responsive to a sensed environmental condition, as taught within Garcia Briz, to minimize power loss and a reduction in power transmission efficiency caused by less than ideal power transfer characteristics as sensed by Kwon, thereby improving overall system efficiency, safety, and reliability and establishing a more dynamic and robust power transfer system capable of adjusting power transfer characteristics under changing conditions . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 38 and 48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0343765) in view of Deng (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2022/0014047) . Regarding Claims 38 and 48: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claims 31 and 42, respectively. Kwon further discloses wherein the control circuitry measures a present quality factor and resonant frequency of the wireless power transmitting coil by: causing an inverter to provide one or more signal pulses to the wireless power transmitting coil; using the measurement circuitry to measure responses to the provided one or more signal pulses (Fig. 3, inverter 320 and its related discussion; see, at least paragraphs 0139, 0173, etc.) . Kwon does not disclose wherein the responses including a ringing signal with a decay envelope characterized by a frequency of the ringing signal and the present quality factor; and determining the present quality factor and resonant frequency from the frequency of the ringing signal. However, Deng discloses wherein the responses including a ringing signal with a decay envelope characterized by a frequency of the ringing signal and the present quality factor; and determining the present quality factor and resonant frequency from the frequency of the ringing signal (see, at least, paragraphs 0004, 0042-0044) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to to have determined both the Q factor and the resonant frequency from the decay, as taught within Deng, in order to more accurately and positively determine the current operating conditions of the system via such known techniques . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 39 and 50 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0343765) in view of Park et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2019/0131826) . Regarding Claims 39 and 50: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claims 31 and 42, respectively. While Kwon discloses the corresponding baseline values are measured, Kwon does not disclose during manufacture of the wireless power transmitter. However, Park et al. discloses during manufacture of the wireless power transmitter (see, at least, paragraph 0227) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kwon to include the baseline values during manufacturing, as taught within Park, in order to have some data for the transmitter configurations to compare with the current data to ensure adequate measurements with respect to the current operating conditions and environment . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 40 and 51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0343765) in view of Park (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2020/0259373) . Regarding Claims 40 and 51: Kwon teaches the limitations of the preceding claims 31 and 42, respectively. While Kwon discloses the corresponding baseline values, Kwon does not disclose the corresponding baseline values are updated during in field operation of the wireless power transmitter. However, Park discloses values are updated during in field operation of the wireless power transmitter (see, at least, paragraph 0216) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kwon to update the baseline values during operation, as taught within Park, in order to have the updated and timely versions of the transmitter configurations in order to more efficiently control and adjust power transfer characteristics within a changing environment, thereby improving overall system efficiency and flexibility. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH N INGE whose telephone number is (571)270-7705. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-4:00 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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 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 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. /JOSEPH N INGE/Examiner, Art Unit 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 2 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 3 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 4 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 5 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 6 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 7 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 8 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 9 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 10 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 11 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 12 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 13 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 14 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 15 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 16 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 17 Art Unit: 2836 Application/Control Number: 18/612,904 Page 18 Art Unit: 2836
Prosecution Insights