DETAILED ACTION
This is the First Office Action on the Merits and is directed towards claims 70-90 as preliminarily amended and filed on 06/03/2024.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
Priority is claimed as set forth below, accordingly the earliest possible effective filing date is 09-DEC-2021 (20211209).
The present application, effectively filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application number 63287970 filed on 09-DEC-2021, U.S. Provisional Application number 63314358 filed on 25-FEB-2022, U.S. Provisional Application number 63349046 filed on 04-JUN-2022, U.S. Provisional Application number 63358152 filed on 04-JUL-2022. This patent application also claims priority from PCT/US22/81315 filed on 12/09/2022.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 70-89 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170015397 A1 to Mitchell; Sean McGrath et al. (Mitchell cited in the European Search Report) in view of US 20140375272 A1 to Johnsen; Stephen G. et al. (Johnsen).
Regarding claim 70 Mitchell teaches in for example the Figure(s) reproduced immediately below:
PNG
media_image1.png
652
438
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
545
497
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and associated descriptive texts a method for powering at least one Power Electronics Controller of a first EV,
the method comprising steps of supplying electrical energy from an EV trailer battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller (in for example Figure 24A above battery pack 18 in trailer 242 para:
“[0099] FIGS. 24A and 24B show a trailer regenerative braking and boat/EV car recharging system 240. A trailer 242 comprising one or more axles 244 and having wheels 246, like any conventional boat trailer, is used to transport the watercraft 14 over land. One or more of these axles 244 would further comprise one or more electric motors 248 of any kind that would use regenerative braking to slow the trailer 242, much like a normal trailers brake pads. The regenerative braking can be the main form of braking the trailer 242 or used to augment normal braking techniques, such as brake pads. Rather than using normal braking, such as brake pads, electric motors 248 on each axle, hub motors or other type of electric motor use regenerative braking to slow the trailer behind the car. The trailer 242 can be wired to the watercraft 14 that it is carrying, and the energy created from regenerative braking can be fed into the watercraft's battery pack 18. A plurality of chargers 250 are dispersed through the trailer regenerative braking and boat/EV car recharging system 240. The trailer 242 can be wired to the electric vehicle pulling it, and the regenerative braking energy can be fed into the electric vehicle's battery to provide a greater range when towing. In one embodiment, the trailer 242 could have a battery pack 18 (not shown) to provide extended range for the electric vehicle towing it.”).
Mitchell does not appear to expressly disclose the method comprising steps of supplying electrical energy from a Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack.
In analogous art Johnsen teaches in for example, the figures below:
PNG
media_image3.png
221
482
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
522
764
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
154
217
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
583
362
media_image6.png
Greyscale
And associated descriptive texts including para:
“[0083] The mobile energy storage apparatus 102 may be connected to one or more auxiliary energy storage device(s) (such as a solar photovoltaic backup battery system, an electric vehicle 100, another energy storage apparatus, etc.) to transfer energy to the auxiliary energy storage device(s) from the mobile energy storage apparatus 102, or to the mobile energy storage apparatus 102 from the auxiliary energy storage device(s). If the auxiliary energy storage device(s) is an electric vehicle 100, the mobile energy storage apparatus 102 could be towed to the location of that electric vehicle 100 to provide power to it if the electric vehicle 100 were out of power and was stranded. After transferring energy from the mobile energy storage apparatus 102 to the stranded electric vehicle 100, the vehicle would have enough capacity to make it to a location where it could charge, or possibly make it to its final destination. Power could also be transferred into the mobile energy storage apparatus 102 from another electric vehicle's battery pack 114.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the ability to transfer energy from another electric vehicles battery pack disclosed in Johnsen with the energy transfer taught in Mitchell with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided “a flexible solution for propulsion that does not rely on one energy source” as taught by Johnsen Para(s):
“[0004] At the time of this writing, the combustion engine is the most common form of propulsion for land vehicles, water craft, and aircraft. The most common combustion engines are fueled by petroleum or other fossil fuels, which are in limited supply on this planet. It would be advantageous to have a flexible solution for propulsion that does not rely on one energy source.”.
Regarding claim 71 and the limitation the method of claim 70 wherein the Powered Watercraft EV has at least a primary propulsion apparatus comprising an electric drive system having at least the battery pack and configured at least to power at least a propellor and/or impeller of the Powered Watercraft EV (see Mitchell Figures 1A-B above and para:
“[0054] Turning now to the drawings in general, and to FIGS. 1A and 1B in particular, there is shown therein an embodiment of the electric propulsion system 10 of the present invention disposed in the hull 12 of a watercraft 14 or other vessel for use in marine applications. The system 10 may further comprise a thrust mechanism 16, such as a propeller or impeller. The electric propulsion system 10 comprises a plurality of battery cells 30 or a modular battery pack 18, a charger 20 and an electric motor 22. It will be appreciated that there may be more than one of each of the components comprising the electrical propulsion system 10 of the present invention. It further will be appreciated that the electric motor 22 may be comprised of outboard, inboard, I/O sterndrives, water jet, v-drive or other propulsion techniques. The motor 22 includes the actual power-train, which drives the thrust mechanism 16, battery packs 18, chargers, AC/DC converters, controllers and all other components yet to be described and which are necessary or useful to use electricity to charge the battery cells, which provide power to the system 10. It will be appreciated that system 10 components may comprise an integral unit but do not have to be one integral unit and may be positioned throughout the watercraft 14.”).
Regarding claim 72 and the limitation the method of claim 70 wherein the first EV has at least a primary propulsion apparatus comprising an electric drive system comprising at least the battery pack and the Power Electronics Controller, the first EV’s electric drive system configured to at least power at least a wheel of the first EV (see Mitchell para [0099] above “The trailer 242 can be wired to the electric vehicle pulling it, and the regenerative braking energy can be fed into the electric vehicle's battery to provide a greater range when towing.”).
Regarding claim 73 and the limitation the method of claim 71 wherein the first EV has at least a primary propulsion apparatus comprising an electric drive system comprising at least the battery pack and the Power Electronics Controller, the first EV’s electric drive system configured to at least power at least a wheel of the first EV (see Mitchell para [0099] above “The trailer 242 can be wired to the electric vehicle pulling it, and the regenerative braking energy can be fed into the electric vehicle's battery to provide a greater range when towing.”).
Regarding claim 74 and the limitation the method of claim 72 wherein the first EV’s primary propulsion apparatuses battery pack comprises a traction battery (see Mitchell para [0099] above “The trailer 242 can be wired to the electric vehicle pulling it, and the regenerative braking energy can be fed into the electric vehicle's battery to provide a greater range when towing.”).
Regarding claim 75 and the limitation the method of claim 73 wherein the first EV’s primary propulsion apparatuses battery pack comprises a traction battery (see Mitchell para [0099] above “The trailer 242 can be wired to the electric vehicle pulling it, and the regenerative braking energy can be fed into the electric vehicle's battery to provide a greater range when towing.”).
Regarding claim 76 and the limitation the method of claim 70 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while the first EV is in motion and driving (see the obviousness to combine and the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 70 above incorporated herein by reference wherein it is understood that the electric boat of Mitchell connotes the “another vehicle” taught by Johnsen.).
Regarding claim 77 and the limitation the method of claim 71 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while the first EV is in motion and driving (see the obviousness to combine and the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 70 above incorporated herein by reference wherein it is understood that the electric boat of Mitchell connotes the “another vehicle” taught by Johnsen.).
Regarding claim 78 and the limitation the method of claim 74 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while the first EV is in motion and driving (see the obviousness to combine and the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 70 above incorporated herein by reference wherein it is understood that the electric boat of Mitchell connotes the “another vehicle” taught by Johnsen.).
Regarding claim 79 and the limitation the method of claim 75 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while the first EV is in motion and driving (see the obviousness to combine and the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 70 above incorporated herein by reference wherein it is understood that the electric boat of Mitchell connotes the “another vehicle” taught by Johnsen.).
Regarding claim 80 and the limitation the method of claim 74 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while the first EV is in motion and driving (see the obviousness to combine and the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 70 above incorporated herein by reference wherein it is understood that the electric boat of Mitchell connotes the “another vehicle” taught by Johnsen.).
Regarding claim 81 and the limitation the method of claim 70 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while bypassing the first EV’s charging system (it is considered that the combination of Mitchell and Johnsen teaches these limitations because the energy is being supplied from the trailer and watercraft and not via the typical EV “charging system”. Further, the trailer battery and watercraft battery are being used to merely extend the useful range of the electric vehicle, not to charge the EV. Accordingly the combination is considered as bypassing the first EV’s charging system for at least these 2 rationale.)
Regarding claim 82 and the limitation the method of claim 71 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while bypassing the first EV’s charging system (it is considered that the combination of Mitchell and Johnsen teaches these limitations because the energy is being supplied from the trailer and watercraft and not via the typical EV “charging system”. Further, the trailer battery and watercraft battery are being used to merely extend the useful range of the electric vehicle, not to charge the EV. Accordingly the combination is considered as bypassing the first EV’s charging system for at least these 2 rationale.)
Regarding claim 83 and the limitation the method of claim 74 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while bypassing the first EV’s charging system (it is considered that the combination of Mitchell and Johnsen teaches these limitations because the energy is being supplied from the trailer and watercraft and not via the typical EV “charging system”. Further, the trailer battery and watercraft battery are being used to merely extend the useful range of the electric vehicle, not to charge the EV. Accordingly the combination is considered as bypassing the first EV’s charging system for at least these 2 rationale.)
Regarding claim 84 and the limitation the method of claim 75 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while bypassing the first EV’s charging system (it is considered that the combination of Mitchell and Johnsen teaches these limitations because the energy is being supplied from the trailer and watercraft and not via the typical EV “charging system”. Further, the trailer battery and watercraft battery are being used to merely extend the useful range of the electric vehicle, not to charge the EV. Accordingly the combination is considered as bypassing the first EV’s charging system for at least these 2 rationale.)
Regarding claim 85 and the limitation the method of claim 78 comprising additional steps of selecting to supply the electrical energy from the Powered Watercraft EV’s battery pack to the first EV’s at least one Power Electronics Controller while bypassing the first EV’s charging system (it is considered that the combination of Mitchell and Johnsen teaches these limitations because the energy is being supplied from the trailer and watercraft and not via the typical EV “charging system”. Further, the trailer battery and watercraft battery are being used to merely extend the useful range of the electric vehicle, not to charge the EV. Accordingly the combination is considered as bypassing the first EV’s charging system for at least these 2 rationale.)
Regarding claim 86 and the limitation the method of claim 74 further comprising steps of configuring a system controller of at least the first EV to permit the first EV to source the electrical energy from the battery pack of the Powered Watercraft EV while the first EV is in motion and driving (it is considered that the combination of Mitchell and Johnsen teaches these limitations because the energy is being supplied from the trailer and another vehicle which connotes the watercraft.)
Regarding claim 87 and the limitation the method of claim 75 further comprising steps of configuring a system controller of at least the first EV to permit the first EV to source the electrical energy from the battery pack of the Powered Watercraft EV while the first EV is in motion and driving (it is considered that the combination of Mitchell and Johnsen teaches these limitations because the energy is being supplied from the trailer and another vehicle which connotes the watercraft.)
Regarding claim 88 and the limitation A method of assembling a first EV that is a wheeled EV having at least an electric drive system including at least a battery pack and a Power Electronics Controller,
the method comprising steps of selecting to equip the first EV at least with electronic components enabling it to use battery charge contained in a battery pack of at least a Powered Watercraft EV to power the first EV’s Power Electronics Controller (see the obviousness to combine and the rejection of corresponding parts of claim 70 above incorporated herein by reference wherein it is understood that the electric watercraft of Mitchell is taught to be another vehicle capable of charging the towing electric vehicle by Johnsen para [0083]).
Regarding claim 89 and the limitation the method of claim 88 further comprising steps of selecting to configure the first EV to be capable of Bi-directional charging and having at least one charge port,
the method comprising steps of selecting to enable the Bi-directional charging capability of the first EV to be electrically communicative through another plug distinct from the at least one charge port, where the another plug is located proximal the rear of the EV (see the teachings of both references with regard to the standard charging port in an electric vehicle and that it is known in the trailer art for trailer plugs 108 (connotes the “another plug”) are typically placed near/proximal the rear of the vehicle where the trailer is typically connected as evidenced by Johnsen Figures 2B, 11 and 12 reproduced immediately below).
PNG
media_image7.png
239
489
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
748
534
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim 90 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170015397 A1 to Mitchell; Sean McGrath et al. (Mitchell cited in the European Search Report) in view of US 20140375272 A1 to Johnsen; Stephen G. et al. (Johnsen) as applied to the claims above in view of US 20220126714 A1 to Bucknor; Norman K. et al. (Bucknor).
Regarding claim 90 and the limitation the method of claim 89 further comprising configuring the first EV to be capable of transmitting electrical energy from an external charger detachably connected to the at least one charge port of the first EV to charge either or both the battery of the First EV Johnsen para:
“[0074] The mobile energy storage apparatus 102 is connected to the host/tow electric vehicle 100 by means of a connector 108 to facilitate the transfer of power from the mobile energy storage apparatus 102 to the electric vehicle's battery pack 114 or to other systems individually or in combination. This electrical connection is made using a suitable connector 108 rated appropriately for the power levels that the electric vehicle 100 or other electric device(s) use. Ideally, electrical conductors would be connected to the most positive and most negative points of the battery pack 114 thereby being in parallel with the electric vehicle's battery pack 114 or system. A similar thing could be accomplished by connecting to the main positive and negative connections on the propulsion control system. It is also possible that an existing service connection or charge port on the electric vehicle 100 could be used. Such examples might include connecting directly to the EV's charging inlet, such as, but not limited to, a high power DC or AC connector like the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) J1772 or the Japanese developed CHAdeMO connections.”,
The combination of Mitchell and Johnsen does not appear to expressly disclose the method comprising configuring the first EV to be capable of transmitting electrical energy from the external charger when it is detachably connected to the at least one charge port of the first EV to the at least one Powered Watercraft EV through the another plug and/or connector and/or trailer plug connected to and/or integral with the first EV.
In analogous art Bucknor teaches in for example, the figures below:
PNG
media_image9.png
521
686
media_image9.png
Greyscale
And associated descriptive texts configuring a first EV to be capable of transmitting electrical energy from the external charger when it is detachably connected to the at least one charge port of the first EV to the at least one range extender trailer through the another plug and/or connector and/or trailer plug connected to and/or integral with the first EV (in para:
“[0032] The battery pack 17 is rechargeable and may be recharged simultaneously during a recharging operation of a vehicle energy pack 22 which provides operational energy for the BEV 12. The battery pack 17 may also be recharged independently of the BEV 12 which permits recharging at a storage location of the powered trailer 14 or with the powered trailer 14 disengaged from the BEV 12.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the ability to charge the range extender trailer disclosed in Bucknor with the charging methods taught in combination of Mitchell and Johnsen with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided a convenient way to charge both the electric vehicle and the range extender trailer and watercraft simultaneously as taught by Bucknor para [0032].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as teaching, inter alia, the state of the art at the time of the invention. For example:
US 20120303259 A1 to Prosser; Ronald D. teaches, inter alia Providing Roadside Charging Services in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
“Methods for providing electrical charging services are disclosed, including receiving dispatch information for a service vehicle, receiving charging instructions including an amount of charge to provide to a stranded or depleted EV, providing the amount of charge, and providing a charging station location to the EV or an EV passenger or occupant. Additional methods describe how to determine a charging station location for the EV, reserving an EV charger for the EV, and making roadside payment transactions. Other methods disclosed include receiving information about an EV in need of charging services, selecting and assigning a service vehicle to assist the EV, and distributing relevant information to the EV such as an amount of energy to provide to the EV that would allow the EV to reach a charging station for a more complete charge. Resupply of the service vehicle and providing guidance to reach the EV may also be provided.”.
US 5583414 A to Lawrence; Raymond A. teaches, inter alia Systems for charging batteries of boats while being towed in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
“A system for charging batteries of boats while being towed comprising a vehicle primary battery with an anode and a cathode for electrically powering a vehicle during use, front electrical lines extending rearwardly with a receptacle fixed to the vehicle, the vehicle adapted to have a hitch at the rearward end thereof for towing a trailer. A secondary battery for powering a boat when in use in the water, the secondary battery having an anode and a cathode and rear electrical lines extending forwardly therefrom to a forward position for coupling with the front lines.”.
US 20110042154 A1 to Bartel; Brian Daniel teaches, inter alia a SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR TOWING A TRAILER in for example the ABSTRACT, Figures and/or Paragraphs below:
“Systems for towing a trailer by a towing vehicle and a method for controlling such a system are disclosed. The systems and method are configured to maintain a constant towing load on the towing vehicle as well as optimizing other performance criteria such as fuel efficiency. The system comprises a closed loop controller, a towing arm assembly, a load measuring device, an electric hub motor, brakes, a motor controller and a brake controller disposed on the trailer. In another embodiment, two separate systems are installed, one on each side of the trailer. A load force feeds into a PID controller programmed with preset proportional, differential and integral parameters. The PID controller generates a command signal to either modulate the brakes or motor up or down depending on the sign of the command signal. A process output updates the system which continuously adjusts based on driving conditions.”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL LAWSON GREENE JR whose telephone number is (571)272-6876. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-THUR 7-5:30PM (EST) or via email at DanielL.GreeneJr@USPTO.GOV under the guidance of MPEP [R-09.2017] Section 502.03 Communications via Internet Electronic Mail (email) [R-07.2015].
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571) 272-7298. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL L GREENE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665 20251018