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 .
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.
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 Interpretation
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a system (or apparatus or product) claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur. The system claim interpretation differs from a method claim interpretation because the claimed structure must be present in the system regardless of whether the condition is met and the function is actually performed. See MPEP 2111.04(II). "[i]f the condition for performing a contingent step is not satisfied, the performance recited by the step need not be carried out in order for the claimed method to be performed" (quotation omitted). Ex parte Schulhauser, Appeal 2013-007847 (PTAB April 28, 2016).
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) 1-3, 5, 7-10, 12, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0137688 to Wang et al. (“Wang”), US Patent Application Publication Number 2021/0356924 to Donnig et al. (“Donnig”), and knowledge commonly known in the art, as evidenced by US Patent Application Publication Number 2018/0316270 to Radic et al. (“Radic”).
In reference to Claim 1, Wang discloses a multi-port power delivery system (See Figure 1 Number 100 and Paragraph 22) for allocating a system power for delivering power to a plurality of external sink devices (See Paragraph 24), comprising: a first power converter (See Figure 1 Number 130_1 and Paragraph 22) coupled between a first connection port connected to a first external sink device (See Figure 1 Number 140_1 and Paragraphs 22 and 24) and the system power (See Paragraphs 22 and 25); a second power converter (See Figure 1 Number 130_2 and Paragraph 22) coupled between a second connection port connected to a second external sink device (See Figure 1 Number 140_2 and Paragraphs 22 and 24) and the system power (See Paragraphs 22 and 25); and a controller coupled to the first power converter, the second power converter, the first connection port and the second connection port (See Figure 1 Number 110 and Paragraphs 23 and 26-29), the controller configured to perform following features: (a) negotiate a first power requirement of the first connection port and a second power requirement of the second connection port, and determine a first power budget of the first connection port and a second power budget of the second connection port (See Paragraphs 3, 26, and 28), wherein the controller is further configured to: (a1) classify the first power requirement as a first type based on a first voltage requirement in the first power requirement (See Paragraphs 37-43); (a2) classify the second power requirement as a second type based on a second voltage requirement in the second power requirement (See Paragraphs 37-43); and (a3) determine the first power budget and the second power budget based on the first type and the second type using stored information (See Paragraphs 37-43); (b) calculate a first actual power of the first connection port and a second actual power of the second connection port (See Paragraph 29); and (c) monitor the difference between the first actual power and the first power budget and the difference between the second actual power and the second power budget, and adjust the first power budget and the second power budget accordingly (See Paragraphs 28-33), wherein the controller is further configured to negotiate the power requirement with the first connection port and the second connection port to reduce the first power budget and increase the second power budget when the first actual power is less than a first threshold and the second actual power is greater than a second threshold (See Paragraphs 29, 34-35, and 38-42). However, Wang is silent as to how the first and second type information used for determining the first and second power budges is stored, and does not explicitly disclose the use of a lookup table. Official Notice is taken that the use of lookup tables is well known in the art, as evidenced by Radic (See Paragraphs 69-70). Wang further does not explicitly disclose calculating a first average power of the first connection port and a second average power of the second connection port and using the first and second average powers for negotiating the power requirements. Donnig discloses a multi-port power delivery system (See Figure 1 Number 100 and Paragraphs 37 and 44) for allocating a system power for delivering power to a plurality of external sink devices (See Figure 1 Numbers 10a-10n and Paragraph 44), comprising: a first power converter (See Figure 1 Number 3b and Paragraphs 43-45) coupled between a first connection port (See Figure 1 Number 2a and Paragraph 44) connected to a first external sink device (See Figure 1 Number 10a and Paragraph 44) and the system power (See Figure 1 Numbers 5 and 20 and Paragraph 38); the first power converter coupled between a second connection port (See Figure 1 Number 2b and Paragraph 44) connected to a second external sink device (See Figure 1 Number 10b and Paragraph 44) and the system power; and a controller coupled to the first power converter, the first connection port, and the second connection port (See Figure 1 Number 7 and Paragraphs 46-52), the controller configured to perform following features: (a) negotiate a first power requirement of the first connection port and a second power requirement of the second connection port, and determine a first power budget of the first connection port and a second power budget of the second connection port (See Paragraphs 44-45 and 49); (b) calculate a first instantaneous average power of the first connection port and a second instantaneous average power of the second connection port (See Paragraphs 54 and 57); and (c) monitor the difference between the first instantaneous (actual) average power and the first power budget and the difference between the second instantaneous (actual) average power and the second power budget, and adjust the first power budget and the second power budget accordingly (See Paragraphs 50, 52, and 54), wherein the controller is further configured to negotiate the power requirement with the first connection port and the second connection port to reduce the first power budget and increase the second power budget when the first average power is less than a first threshold and the second average power is greater than a second threshold (See Paragraphs 50-55). However, Donnig discloses the use of a single power converter, and does not disclose the use of both a first power converter coupled between the first connection port and the system power and a second power converter coupled between the second connection port and the system power.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention as filed to construct the device of Wang using the instantaneous (actual) average power determination of Donnig and using a well-known lookup table to store the information for determining the power budgets, resulting in the invention of Claim 1, because the simple substitution of the instantaneous (actual) average power determinations of Donnig in place of the actual power determinations of Wang would have yielded the predictable result of disregarding peaks or drops in the power consumption of the external sink devices that arise temporarily and transiently (See Paragraph 54 of Donnig); and because Wang is silent as to how the information for determining the power budgets is stored, and the simple substitution of a well-known lookup table to store the information used for determining the power budgets of Wang and Donnig would have yielded the predictable result of providing hardware efficiency because lookup tables can be compactly implemented because silicon area and/or memory space are negligible, and lookup tables are inherently low power, have low propagation times, and can work with very fast operating frequency (See Paragraph 69 of Radic).
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention as filed to construct the device of Donnig using the separate first and second power converters of Wang and using a well-known lookup table to store the information for determining the power budgets, resulting in the invention of Claim 1, because Donnig is not limited to the use of a single power converter (See Paragraphs 27, 39, 59, and 61 of Donnig), and the simple substitution of the separate first and second power converters of Wang in place of the single power converter of Donnig would have yielded the predictable result of supplying power to the different external sink devices (See Paragraph 25 of Wang) in a manner that provides for increases reliability, as a failure of a power converter will not affect every external sink device; and because it has been held that making components separable is merely a matter of obvious engineering choice (In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961)); and because Wang is silent as to how the information for determining the power budgets is stored, and the simple substitution of a well-known lookup table to store the information used for determining the power budgets of Wang and Donnig would have yielded the predictable result of providing hardware efficiency because lookup tables can be compactly implemented because silicon area and/or memory space are negligible, and lookup tables are inherently low power, have low propagation times, and can work with very fast operating frequency (See Paragraph 69 of Radic).
In reference to Claim 2, Wang, Donnig, and knowledge commonly known in the art disclose the limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Wang further discloses that the multi-port power delivery system complies with a USB Power Delivery specification (See Paragraphs 3, 23, and 26). Donnig further discloses that the multi-port power delivery system complies with a USB Power Delivery specification (See Paragraphs 6, 20, 52, and 56).
In reference to Claim 3, Wang, Donnig, and knowledge commonly known in the art disclose the limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Wang further discloses that the first connection port and the second connection port are USB Type-C connection ports (See Paragraphs 23-24). Donnig further discloses that the first connection port and the second connection port are USB Type-C connection ports (See Paragraph 20 [USB 4.0 requires the use of Type-C connection ports]).
In reference to Claim 5, Wang, Donnig, and knowledge commonly known in the art disclose the limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Wang further discloses that the first power converter comprises a first current sensor for measuring a first current value of the first connection port (See Figure 1 and Paragraph 29); the second power converter comprises a second current sensor for measuring a second current value of the second connection port (See Figure 1 and Paragraph 29); and in the feature (b), the controller is further configured to: (b1) calculate the first actual power based on a first output voltage of the first power budget and the first current value (See Paragraph 29); and (b2) calculate the second actual power based on the second output voltage of the second power budget and the second current value (See Paragraph 29). Donnig further discloses that the first power converter comprises a first current sensor for measuring a first current value of the first connection port (See Figure 1 and Paragraph 54); the second power converter comprises a second current sensor for measuring a second current value of the second connection port (See Figure 1 and Paragraph 54); and in the feature (b), the controller is further configured to: (b1) calculate the first average power based on a first output voltage of the first power budget and the first current value (See Paragraph 54); and (b2) calculate the second average power based on the second output voltage of the second power budget and the second current value (See Paragraph 54).
In reference to Claim 7, Wang, Donnig, and knowledge commonly known in the art disclose the limitations as applied to Claim 6 above. Wang further discloses that the first threshold is smaller than the first power budget and the second threshold is smaller than the second power budget (See Paragraph 34). Donnig further discloses that the first threshold is smaller than the first power budget and the second threshold is smaller than the second power budget (See Paragraph 50).
In reference to Claim 8, Wang discloses a power allocation method applied to a multi-port power delivery system (See Figure 1 Number 100 and Paragraph 22) for allocating system power to a plurality of external sink devices (See Paragraph 24), comprising the steps of:(a) negotiating (See Paragraphs 3, 26, and 28), by a controller (See Figure 1 Number 110 and Paragraphs 23 and 26-29), a first power requirement of a first connection port connected to a first external sink device (See Figure 1 Number 140_1 and Paragraphs 22 and 24) and a second power requirement of a second connection port connected to a second external sink device (See Figure 1 Number 140_2 and Paragraphs 22 and 24), and determining a first power budget for the first connection port and a second power budget for the second connection port based on the first power requirement and the second power requirement (See Paragraphs 3, 26, and 28), wherein determining the first power budget and the second power budget further comprises the following steps: (a1) classifying, by the controller, the first power requirement as a first type based on a first voltage requirement in the first power requirement (See Paragraphs 37-43); (a2) classifying, by the controller, the second power requirement as a second type based on a second voltage requirement in the second power requirement (See Paragraphs 37-43); and (a3) determining, by the controller, the first power budget and the second power budget based on the first type and the second type using stored information (See Paragraphs 37-43); (b) calculating, by the controller, a first actual power of the first connection port and a second actual power of the second connection port (See Paragraph 29); and (c) monitoring, by the controller, the difference between the first actual power and the first power budget and the difference between the second actual power and the second power budget, and adjusting the first power budget and the second power budget accordingly (See Paragraphs 28-33), wherein adjusting the first power budget and the second power budget further comprises the following step: negotiating, by the controller, the power requirement with the first connection port and the second connection port to reduce the first power budget and increase the second power budget when the first actual power is less than a first threshold and the second actual power is greater than a second threshold (See Paragraphs 29, 34-35, and 38-42). However, Wang is silent as to how the first and second type information used for determining the first and second power budges is stored, and does not explicitly disclose the use of a lookup table. Official Notice is taken that the use of lookup tables is well known in the art, as evidenced by Radic (See Paragraphs 69-70). Wang further does not explicitly disclose calculating, by the controller, a first average power of the first connection port and a second average power of the second connection port and using the first and second average powers for negotiating the power requirements. Donnig discloses a power allocation method applied to a multi-port power delivery system (See Figure 1 Number 100 and Paragraphs 37 and 44) for allocating system power to a plurality of external sink devices (See Figure 1 Numbers 10a-10n and Paragraph 44), comprising the steps of: (a) negotiating (See Paragraphs 44-45 and 49), by a controller (See Figure 1 Number 7 and Paragraphs 46-52), a first power requirement of a first connection port (See Figure 1 Number 2a and Paragraph 44) connected to a first external sink device (See Figure 1 Number 10a and Paragraph 44) and a second power requirement of a second connection port (See Figure 1 Number 2b and Paragraph 44) connected to a second external sink device (See Figure 1 Number 10b and Paragraph 44), and determining a first power budget for the first connection port and a second power budget for the second connection port based on the first power requirement and the second power requirement (See Paragraphs 44-45 and 49); (b) calculating, by the controller, a first average power of the first connection port and a second average power of the second connection port (See Paragraphs 54 and 57); and (c) monitoring, by the controller, the difference between the first instantaneous (actual) average power and the first power budget and the difference between the second instantaneous (actual) average power and the second power budget, and adjusting the first power budget and the second power budget accordingly (See Paragraphs 50, 52, and 54), wherein adjusting the first power budget and the second power budget further comprises the following step: negotiating, by the controller, the power requirement with the first connection port and the second connection port to reduce the first power budget and increase the second power budget when the first average power is less than a first threshold and the second average power is greater than a second threshold (See Paragraphs 50-55). However, Donnig discloses the use of a single power converter, and does not disclose the use of both a first power converter coupled between the first connection port and the system power and a second power converter coupled between the second connection port and the system power.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention as filed to construct the device of Wang using the instantaneous (actual) average power determination of Donnig and using a well-known lookup table to store the information for determining the power budgets, resulting in the invention of Claim 8, because the simple substitution of the instantaneous (actual) average power determinations of Donnig in place of the actual power determinations of Wang would have yielded the predictable result of disregarding peaks or drops in the power consumption of the external sink devices that arise temporarily and transiently (See Paragraph 54 of Donnig); and because Wang is silent as to how the information for determining the power budgets is stored, and the simple substitution of a well-known lookup table to store the information used for determining the power budgets of Wang and Donnig would have yielded the predictable result of providing hardware efficiency because lookup tables can be compactly implemented because silicon area and/or memory space are negligible, and lookup tables are inherently low power, have low propagation times, and can work with very fast operating frequency (See Paragraph 69 of Radic).
Alternatively, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention as filed to construct the device of Donnig using the separate first and second power converters of Wang and using a well-known lookup table to store the information for determining the power budgets, resulting in the invention of Claim 8, because Donnig is not limited to the use of a single power converter (See Paragraphs 27, 39, 59, and 61 of Donnig), and the simple substitution of the separate first and second power converters of Wang in place of the single power converter of Donnig would have yielded the predictable result of supplying power to the different external sink devices (See Paragraph 25 of Wang) in a manner that provides for increases reliability, as a failure of a power converter will not affect every external sink device; and because it has been held that making components separable is merely a matter of obvious engineering choice (In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961)); and because Wang is silent as to how the information for determining the power budgets is stored, and the simple substitution of a well-known lookup table to store the information used for determining the power budgets of Wang and Donnig would have yielded the predictable result of providing hardware efficiency because lookup tables can be compactly implemented because silicon area and/or memory space are negligible, and lookup tables are inherently low power, have low propagation times, and can work with very fast operating frequency (See Paragraph 69 of Radic).
It is noted that Claim 8 is a method claim that recites contingent limitations. As indicated above, if the condition for performing a contingent step is not satisfied, the performance recited by the step need not be carried out in order for the claimed method to be performed
In reference to Claim 9, Wang, Donnig, and knowledge commonly known in the art disclose the limitations as applied to Claim 8 above. Wang further discloses that the multi-port power delivery system complies with a USB Power Delivery specification (See Paragraphs 3, 23, and 26). Donnig further discloses that the multi-port power delivery system complies with a USB Power Delivery specification (See Paragraphs 6, 20, 52, and 56).
In reference to Claim 10, Wang, Donnig, and knowledge commonly known in the art disclose the limitations as applied to Claim 8 above. Wang further discloses that the first connection port and the second connection port are USB Type-C connection ports (See Paragraphs 23-24). Donnig further discloses that the first connection port and the second connection port are USB Type-C connection ports (See Paragraph 20 [USB 4.0 requires the use of Type-C connection ports]).
In reference to Claim 12, Wang, Donnig, and knowledge commonly known in the art disclose the limitations as applied to Claim 8 above. Wang further discloses that the step (b) further comprises the following steps: (b1) measuring, by a first current sensor, a first current value of the first connection port (See Figure 1 and Paragraph 29); (b2) measuring, by a second current sensor, a second current value of the second connection port (See Figure 1 and Paragraph 29); (b3) calculating, by the controller, a first average current value based on the first current value (See Paragraph 29), and a second average current value based on the second current value (See Paragraph 29); (b4) calculating, by the controller, the first average power based on a first output voltage of the first power budget and the first average current value (See Paragraph 29); and (b5) calculating, by the controller, the second average power based on a second output voltage of the second power budget and the second average current value (See Paragraph 29). Donnig further discloses that the step (b) further comprises the following steps: (b1) measuring, by a first current sensor, a first current value of the first connection port (See Figure 1 and Paragraph 54); (b2) measuring, by a second current sensor, a second current value of the second connection port (See Figure 1 and Paragraph 54); (b3) calculating, by the controller, a first average current value based on the first current value (See Paragraph 54), and a second average current value based on the second current value (See Paragraph 54); (b4) calculating, by the controller, the first average power based on a first output voltage of the first power budget and the first average current value (See Paragraph 54); and (b5) calculating, by the controller, the second average power based on a second output voltage of the second power budget and the second average current value (See Paragraph 54).
In reference to Claim 14, Wang, Donnig, and knowledge commonly known in the art disclose the limitations as applied to Claim 8 above. Wang further discloses that the first threshold is smaller than the first power budget and the second threshold is smaller than the second power budget (See Paragraph 34). Donnig further discloses that the first threshold is smaller than the first power budget and the second threshold is smaller than the second power budget (See Paragraph 50).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the alleged failure of Wang and Donnig to disclose the claimed lookup table (See Pages 7-8, 10, and 11) are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Applicant has argued that the claimed invention does not rely on connection or disconnection events to trigger reallocation, and instead continuously monitors existing connected devices during normal operations and dynamically reallocates power (See Pages 9-10 and 11). In response, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant has argued that the claimed invention performs proactive negotiation to transfer unused power budget from a low-utilization port to a high-demand port during normal operation (See Pages 9-10 and 11). In response, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS J CLEARY whose telephone number is (571)272-3624. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 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, Andrew Jung can be reached at 571-270-3779. 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.
/THOMAS J. CLEARY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175