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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 -20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite a method of acquiring a distance and determining a position (Claim 1) or an apparatus which implements the same method (Claim 18). This is a mental process which can be performed on a generic computer (See MPEP 2106.04.a(2)).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because it is simply integrated into a “battery swap apparatus”, which is simply a general linking to a technological environment. Further, there is nothing in the method which can only be linked to a battery swap apparatus, instead of simply linked to any movable apparatus. Lastly, a battery swap apparatus is generic in itself, as it is any apparatus which can aid in changing a battery.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the elements recited are generic (“distance measuring device” in claim 1 and 18, and “controller” in claim 18) and do not have any particular elements. A distance measuring device is a generic machine without particular details (See MPEP 2106.05(b).I). A controller is the same, and also falls under a technological environment of generic computer functions (See MPEP 21.06.06(h)).
Independent claims are discussed below.
Claim 2: Claim 2 simply adds a “power transmission device” which is also a generic element and does not overcome the rejection. This is simply an element which moves and detects movement of a motor. This is simply a technological environment without particular details, such as how the measurement is actually made.
Claim 3: Claim 3 adds a motor, and a second distance determined by the number of rotations of the motor. This claim does not overcome the above rejection, as the motor is not doing the distance measurement. This is a pre-solution activity (as Claim 1 is written, the battery swap apparatus moves in order for the distance measurement to be performed, and the motor simply implements that pre-solution activity). Further, a motor is a well-understood apparatus to move an object. Thus, it is an extra-solution activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claim 4: Claim 4 simply adds an encoder. This is also a generic device which simply determines the second distance (See specification [0011]) and does not have any particular structure. Thus, this does not overcome the rejection.
Claim 5: Claim 5 recites a laser distance measuring device. This does not overcome the rejection, as using a laser measuring device is both well-understood and routine in the art (As LiDAR is very common – see 103 rejection below) and is simply a field of use which limits the claim to laser devices.
Claims 6-11: Claims 6-11 simply claim further distance measurement and determination steps as the device is moved. These does not have any additional elements to overcome the rejection
Claims 12-16: Claims 12-15 claim various aspects of the motor and moving mechanism. As in Claim 3 above, this does not link the abstract idea of “distance measurement” with anything more, as the motor(s), moving mechanisms, and associated elements are not doing the distance measurement. Thus, it is an extra-solution activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claim 17: Claim 17 recites a processor and memory. This is simply a technological environment (i.e.: a computer), and thus does not overcome the above rejection (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claim 19: Claim 18 adds a slide rail. This does not overcome the rejection, as the slide rail is not doing the abstract idea of “distance measurement”. Further, a motor is a well-understood apparatus to move an object. Thus, it is an extra-solution activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Claim 20: Claim 20 recites a reflective plate. Although this is being used in the distance measuring device. First, a reflective plate is well known in distance measuring (See 103 rejection below). Further, the claim simply states it is there, and has no information about how it is actually incorporated into the distance measuring device, and thus it does not add anything to overcome the rejection.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-11, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang (CN 114475340 A).
Claim 1: Zhang teaches a method of detecting a position of a battery swap apparatus, the battery swap apparatus being provided with a distance measuring device, and the method comprising: acquiring, from the distance measuring device, a first distance by which the battery swap apparatus moves; and determining the position of the battery swap apparatus according to the first distance (pg 19).
Claim 2: Zhang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the battery swap apparatus is further provided with a power transmission device, and the method further comprises: acquiring, by means of the power transmission device, a second distance by which the battery swap apparatus moves; and detecting the position of the battery swap apparatus according to the first distance and the second distance (pg 20).
Claim 3: Zhang teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein the power transmission device comprises a motor, the motor is used to drive the battery swap apparatus to move, and that acquiring, by means of the power transmission device, a second distance by which the battery swap apparatus moves comprises: determining the second distance by which the battery swap apparatus moves according to the number of rotations of the motor (pg 20).
Claim 6: Zhang teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein that acquiring, from the distance measuring device, a first distance by which the battery swap apparatus moves comprises: with the battery swap apparatus in a first position, acquiring, from the distance measuring device, the first distance by which the battery swap apparatus moves, wherein the first position is a position where the battery swap apparatus is after moving by the second distance from an initial position, and the initial position is a position where the power transmission device starts to calculate the second distance (pg 20 - determining first position is in first telescopic range, then calculating second position).
Claim 7: Zhang teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein acquiring, from the distance measuring device, a first distance by which the battery swap apparatus moves comprises: with the battery swap apparatus in the initial position, acquiring a first reference distance from the distance measuring device; with the battery swap apparatus in the first position, acquiring a second reference distance from the distance measuring device; and determining the first distance according to the first reference distance and the second reference distance (pg 20).
Claim 8: Zhang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein that determining the position of the battery swap apparatus according to the first distance and the second distance comprises: calculating a distance difference between the second distance and the first distance; and determining whether the battery swap apparatus is in a target position according to the distance difference (pg 20).
Claim 9: Zhang teaches the method according to claim 8, wherein that determining whether the battery swap apparatus is in a target position according to the distance difference comprises: if a value of the distance difference is less than a first threshold, determining that the battery swap apparatus is in the target position; and if the value of the distance difference is greater than or equal to the first threshold, determining that the battery swap apparatus is not in the target position (pg 20, judging if device is in first telescopic range).
Claim 10: Zhang teaches the method according to claim 9, wherein if it is determined that the battery swap apparatus is not in the target position, the method further comprises: adjusting the position of the battery swap apparatus according to the distance difference (pg 20 - adjusting position).
Claim 11: Zhang teaches the method according to claim 10, wherein that adjusting the position of the battery swap apparatus according to the distance difference comprises: if the distance difference is a positive number, controlling the battery swap apparatus to move by a third distance along a moving direction of the battery swap apparatus; and if the distance difference is a negative number, controlling the battery swap apparatus to move by the third distance along a moving direction facing away from the battery swap apparatus; wherein the third distance is equal to the value of the distance difference (pg 37 - lifting mechanism).
Claim 16: Zhang teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the battery swap apparatus comprises a first moving mechanism, a second moving mechanism, and a third moving mechanism, and the first moving mechanism, the second moving mechanism, and the third moving mechanism are used to control the battery swap apparatus to move in three mutually perpendicular directions, respectively (pg. 33, second position along length, first perpendicular, and lifting platform).
Claim 17: Zhang teaches a device for detecting a position of a battery swap apparatus, comprising: a processor and a memory, the memory storing instructions, the instructions, when run by the processor, causing the device to execute the method according to claim 1 (pg 43).
Claim 18: Claim 18 is a product claim corresponding to Claim 1. Thus, see rejection above.
Claim 19: Zhang teaches the battery swap station according to claim 18, wherein the battery swap station further comprises: a slide rail, the slide rail extending along a second direction, and the battery swap apparatus moving along the slide rail in the second direction (pg 17, rail 334).
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Blackshaw (US 10954648 B1).
Claim 4: Zhang teaches the method according to Claim 2, , wherein the power transmission device comprises an encoder, the encoder is used to determine the second distance, and that acquiring, by means of the power transmission device, a second distance by which the battery swap apparatus moves comprises: acquiring, from the encoder, the second distance by which the battery swap apparatus moves (pg 20).
However, Zhang does not teach, but Blackshaw does teach, an encoder (Fig. 1, encoder for TOF module 3).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the encoder, as taught by Blackshaw, in the method as taught by Zhang because an encoder for distance measurement is a well known element in the art which would be known to yield predictable results.
Claims 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Wang (CN 202401805 U).
Claim 5: Zhang teaches the method according to Claim 1. Zhang does not teach, but Wang does teach, wherein the distance measuring device is a laser type distance measuring device (abstract).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the laser distance measurement, as taught by Wang, in the method as taught by Zhang, because such measurement devices (LiDARs) are well known in the art, and, in comparison to other methods of distance measurement, such as those that use cameras, LiDARs are simpler and need less processing power to calculate the distance.
Claim 20: Zhang teaches the battery swap station according to Claim 18. Zhang does not teach, but Wang does teach, wherein the battery swap station further comprises: a reflective plate, the reflective plate being perpendicular to the second direction and being disposed facing the distance measuring device, and the second direction being a direction in which the battery swap apparatus moves (Fig. 1, laser reflecting plate 5).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the reflecting plate, as taught by Wang, in the station as taught by Zhang, because this allows for the distance between the station and reflecting plate (in a known location) to be accurately measured.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Anasis (US 20070102242 A1).
Claim 12: Zhang teaches the method according to Claim 3. Zhang does not teach, but Anasis does teach wherein the power transmission device comprises a variable frequency drive, the variable frequency drive is used to control a motor, and the motor is used to drive the battery swap apparatus to move ([0036], [0040] – variable frequency drive controlling two motors in a platform).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the variable frequency drive and two motors, as taught by Anasis, in the method as taught by Zhang because this would allow the speed to be customized, allowing for slower movement close to the desired position, thus allowing more precise positioning. Further, the dual motors connected to one drive would reduce strain on each motor and allow for more even movement.
Claim 13: Zhang, as modified, teaches the method according to claim 12, wherein one variable frequency drive is used to control at least two motors (Anasis [0040]).
Claim 14: Zhang, as modified, teaches the method according to claim 12, wherein the battery swap apparatus is provided with at least two power transmission mechanisms, and each motor of the at least two motors is used to drive one of the power transmission mechanisms to cause the battery swap apparatus to move (Anasis [0040] – note specification of application defines the power transmission device as having the motor in it – [0009]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, in view of Anasis, further in view of Zhang (CN 106515681 A) – hereafter known as Zhang(2).
Claim 15: Zhang, as modified, teaches the method according to Claim 14. Zhang, as modified, does not teach, but Zhang(2) does teach wherein the motor is disposed on a side of the power transmission mechanism facing away from the battery swap apparatus (Fig. 3 and 4, motor A223 facing away from battery swap apparatus A12).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the configuration as taught by Zhang(2) in the method as taught by Zhang, as modified, because this is simply a rearrangement of parts which does not change the claimed method (See MPEP 2144.VI.c).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLARA CHILTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6-2 MT.
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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at 571-270-5227. 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.
/CLARA G CHILTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights