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 § 102
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) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jaipaul (US 2017/0081158).
Regarding claim 13, Jaipaul teaches a vehicle lift system (figs. 2-4) comprising: a vehicle lift (22) comprising: a base (30) configured to traverse a floor ([0006] and [0012]); a carriage (34) configured to receiving a wheel of a vehicle ([0006] and [0012]); a lift actuator (36) configured to vertically raise and lower the carriage relative to the base ([0006] and [0012]); and a wireless charging system (42 and 102) comprising: a battery (42) configured to provide electrical power the vehicle lift ([0026]); and power receiver (102) electrically coupled with the battery ([0026]); and a wireless charger ([0026]) comprising: a power transmitter (106) embedded in the floor and configured to transmit electrical power to the power receiver via magnetic resonance upward through the floor ([0037]).
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.
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) 1-4, 8-10, 12, 15, 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jaipaul (US 2017/0081158) in view of Kang (US 2018/0339600).
Regarding claim 1, Jaipaul teaches a vehicle lift system (figs. 3B-4) comprising: a vehicle lift (22) comprising: a base (30); a carriage (34) configured for receiving a wheel ([0006]); a lift actuator (36) configured to vertically raise and lower the carriage relative to the base ([0006]); and a wireless charging system (42 and 102): a battery (42) configured to provide electrical power to the vehicle lift; and a power receiver (50) electrically coupled with the battery and wireless charger (106) comprising: a power transmitter (106) configured to transmit electrical power to the power receiver via magnetic resonance ([0026]).
Jaipaul fails to teach the power transmitter being movable between a first position and a second position for transmitting the electrical power in the second position.
However, Kang teaches wireless charger (12, [0046]) for an electric vehicle comprising power transmitter being movable between a first position and a second position for transmitting the electrical power in the second position (figs. 2. 3, [0041]-[0045] and [0049]-[0058]).
In view of Kang’s teaching, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Jaipaul by incorporating the teaching as taught by Kang so as to enhance convenience and to provide flexibility in charging position.
Regarding claim 2, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Jaipaul further teaches wherein the power transmitter (106) is ceiling-mounted and configured to transmit the electric power downward toward the power receiver (fig. 7 and [0038]).
Regarding claim 3, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Jaipaul further teaches wherein the power receiver (102) is positioned near a top of the vehicle lift for decreasing a transmitting distance between the power transmitter and the power receiver (fig. 7).
Regarding claim 4, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the first position is retracted position and the second position is a downward extended position relative to the retracted position so that the power transmitter is closer to the power receiver in the extended position than in the retracted position (figs. 2. 3, [0041]-[0045] and [0049]-[0058]).
Regarding claim 8, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the power transmitter is configured to be manually moved between the first position and the second position (figs. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 9, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the wireless charger further comprises a gantry system (160-165) configured to move the power transmitter between the first position and the second position (fig. 2 and [0040]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 10, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the wireless charger further comprises an overhead crane configured to move the power transmitter between the first position and the second position (figs. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 12, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the wireless charging system further comprises a beacon (210) located on the vehicle lift and configured to transmit a locating signal, the power transmitter being configured to be moved from the first position to the second position based on the locating signal ([0055]-[0059]).
Regarding claim 15, Jaipaul teaches a method of wirelessly providing power to a vehicle lift of a vehicle lift system (figs. 2-4 and 7), the method comprising steps of: mounting a power transmitter (106) of a wireless charger of the vehicle lift system on a ceiling in a charging space (fig. 7); positioning the vehicle lift within the charging space between the power transmitter (fig. 7); and wirelessly transmitting the electrical power via magnetic resonance from the power transmitter to a power receiver (102) of the vehicle lift ([0019], [0036]-[0038] and [0040]).
Jaipaul fails to teach moving the power transmitter from a first position to a second position.
However, Kang teaches wireless charger (12, [0046]) for an electric vehicle comprising moving the power transmitter from a first position to a second position (figs. 2. 3, [0041]-[0045] and [0049]-[0058]).
In view of Kang’s teaching, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Jaipaul by incorporating the teaching as taught by Kang so as to enhance convenience and to provide flexibility in charging position.
Regarding claim 16, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the first position is retracted position and the second position is a downward extended position relative to the retracted position such the moving step includes moving the power transmitter closer to the power receiver (figs. 2. 3, [0041]-[0045] and [0049]-[0058]).
Regarding claim 19, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the mounting step includes movably attaching the power transmitter to a gantry system (160-165) and moving step includes actuating the gantry system (fig. 2 and [0040]-[0047]).
Claim(s) 5-7, 11, 17, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jaipaul as modified by Kang as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Seo et al. (KR102338866B1, English machine translation herewith).
Regarding claims 5 and 17, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the power transmitter is configured to move between the first position and the second position (figs. 2 and 3) but silent to automatically move as claimed.
However, Seo teaches charging system that automatically move the plug from the first position to the second position ([0059]).
In view of Seo’s teaching, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jaipaul and Kang for the system to automatically move from first to a second positions as taught by Seo in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Moreover, it has been decided that providing an automatic means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art. See M.P.E.P 2144.04(III).
Regarding claim 6, Jaipaul as modified by Kang and Seo teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Seo further teaches charging system that automatically move the plug from the first position to the second position upon receiving a moving signal from the power receiver ([0066]-[0070]).
Regarding claim 7, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Seo further teaches wherein the power transmitter is configured to automatically move from the second position to the first position upon receiving the move signal, wherein the move signal indicates charging is complete ([0066]-[0070]).
Regarding claims 11 and 20, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the wireless charger further comprises a guide rail system configured to move the power transmitter between the first position and the second position (fig. 2 and [0044]) but silent to a cable suspension as claimed
However, Seo teaches ceiling type charging system for electric vehicle comprising cable suspension system ([0028] and [0029]) configured to move the plug between the first and second positions.
In view of Seo’s teaching, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jaipaul and Kang by incorporating the cable suspension as taught by Seo so that the power transmitter can be moved from first position to the second position using an alternative and well-known support.
Regarding claim 18, Jaipaul as modified by Kang teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Kang further teaches wherein the power transmitter is configured to move between the first position and the second position upon receiving a move signal from the power receiver (figs. 2, 3 and [0038]) but silent to automatically move the power transmitter between the first position and the second position upon receiving a move signal from the power receiver.
However, Seo teaches charging system that automatically move the plug between the first position and the second position upon receiving a moving signal from the power receiver ([0066]-[0070]).
In view of Seo’s teaching, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Jaipaul and Kang for the system to automatically move between the first and the second positions upon receiving a move signal from the power receiver as claimed in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Moreover, it has been decided that providing an automatic means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art. See M.P.E.P 2144.04(III).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jaipaul.
Regarding claim 14, Jaipaul teaches all subject matter claimed as applied above. Jaipaul further teaches wherein the wireless charger further comprises a plurality of power transmitters including power transmitter, wherein the plurality of power transmitters are located in the floor ([0037]) but silent to in a trench.
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Jaipaul to arrange the plurality of power transmitters located in a trench in the floor in order to arrive at the claimed invention. Such modification would not involve any inventive feature since it is just a matter of arranging the plurality of power transmitters in the floor. Moreover, it has been decided that a mere rearrangement of parts is an obvious expedient over a prior art. See M.P.E.P. 2144.01 (VI)(C).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
References: Fagan et al. (US 2013/0240300); Park et al. (US 2012/0293119) are cited because they are related to vehicle wireless charging system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tuyen Kim Vo whose telephone number is (571)270-1657. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs: 8AM-6:30PM.
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, Steven Paik can be reached at 571-272-2404. 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.
/TUYEN K VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights