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 § 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, 2, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu et al. (2019/0089086).
Regarding independent claim 1, Muramatsu teaches an engine-driven-DC-supply unit (Fig. 3) comprising:
an electric generator (24);
an engine (20) that drives the electric generator to generate electric power ([0037]);
an electric power converter (54) that converts the electric power generated by the electric generator to DC power, and outputs the DC power to an external load device (86, i.e. an external charging station; [0041], [0054]) located outside the engine-driven-DC-supply unit;
a controller (60) that controls at least one of the electric power converter or the engine ([0051]);
a controller-housing case (Fig. 1; housing around 28; [0087]-[0089]) that houses at least the controller;
a base member (vehicle, 10) that directly or indirectly supports the electric generator, the engine, the electric power converter, and the controller; and
an electric-equipment-housing-case supporter (Fig. 1; 310/312; [0087]-[0089]) disposed in at least one of the electric generator, the engine, the controller-housing case, or the base member (vehicle, 10), wherein
the engine-driven-DC-supply unit supplies the DC power to the external load device (i.e. a charging station) without providing mechanical power for driving the external load device ([0041]),
the electric-equipment-housing-case supporter supports an electric-equipment-housing case that houses electric equipment electrically connected to the controller, the electric equipment being at least one of a relay circuit including a precharge circuit (inside charger 86), a DC-to-DC converter (50 or 82) that converts the DC power to DC power of a different voltage, or external communication equipment ([0051]-[0052]) configured to communicate with another external equipment (i.e. a mobile phone) different from the engine-driven-DC-supply unit and the external load device by wireless or wired connection (Figs. 1-3),
the electric-equipment-housing-case supporter (inside the vehicle) is so disposed that the electric-equipment-housing case (inside the vehicle) is supported to be free of contact with the external load device (charging station outside the vehicle connected to 86), in a case where the engine-driven-DC-supply unit is electrically connected to the external load device (via cable 34d and charger 86) (the electric-equipment-housing case is free of physical contact with the charging station), and
each of the relay circuit, and the DC-to-DC converter and the external communication equipment is disposed entirely in the electric-equipment-housing case (inside the vehicle).
Muramatsu teaches the idea of various housing cases housing various elements of the engine-driven-DC-supply unit (Fig. 1; [0087]-[0089]). Arguably, Muramatsu fails to explicitly teach the claimed electric-equipment-housing case and the specific claimed elements being disposed entirely inside of it. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to separate and rearrange the parts of Muramatsu’s invention to house the relay circuit, DC/DC converter and external communication equipment entirely inside the electric-equipment-housing case and have that case be different from the controller-housing case, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70), and since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art (Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179).
Regarding claim 2, Muramatsu teaches the engine-driven-DC-supply unit supplies the DC power to an electric power storage (26) or an electrical load included in the external load device. ([0038])
Regarding claim 7, Muramatsu teaches the electric-equipment-housing-case supporter is so disposed that the electric-equipment-housing case is supported at a position (Fig. 1 at/near 28) that is without hindering attachment and detachment of the base member to/from the external load device (which would be the charge port of the vehicle with the external charging station) in a case where the engine-driven-DC-supply unit is attached to the external load device. (Muramatsu teaches the electric-equipment-housing case that is inside the vehicle hood near 28 does not hinder attachment or detachment of the charge port of the base member/vehicle to the external charging station.)
Regarding claim 8, Muramatsu teaches a controller-housing-case supporter disposed in at least one of the electric generator, the engine, or the base member (vehicle 10) such that the controller-housing case is supported at a position at which the controller-housing case is free of contact with the external load device in a case where the engine-driven-DC-supply unit is attached to the external load device (Muramatsu’s controller, near 28, is free of contact with the external charging station).
Muramatsu fails to explicitly teach the electric-equipment-housing-case supporter being so disposed that the electric-equipment-housing case is supported at a position at which the electric-equipment-housing case is attachable to and detachable from the electric-equipment-housing-case supporter even in a state where the controller-housing-case supporter supports the controller-housing case. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the electric-equipment-housing-case supporter being so disposed that the electric-equipment-housing case is supported at a position at which the electric-equipment-housing case is attachable to and detachable from the electric-equipment-housing-case supporter even in a state where the controller-housing-case supporter supports the controller-housing case, since it has been held (as described above in claim 1) that rearranging parts and making them attachable/detachable/separable involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu et al. (2019/0089086) as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Roy et al. (11,270,243). Muramatsu teaches the engine-driven-DC-supply unit as described above. Roy teaches a similar environment (Figs. 1 and 2; i.e. a vehicle and an external charging unit) to that of Muramatsu.
Regarding claim 3, Muramatsu fails to explicitly teach the electric power storage and the electrical load being supported by the external load device (i.e. charging station). Roy teaches an external charging station (100) supporting an electric power storage (120) without being supported by the base member (i.e. vehicle). Also, the Examiner takes Official Notice that it is known in the vehicle charging station art that vehicles can provide power to the charging station and subsequently to consumers connected to the utility grid. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have Roy’s charging station being capable of receiving power from the vehicle and providing it to an electrical load (i.e. controller inside the charging station and/or consumers) supported by the external load device (i.e. charging station), since it is known in the art to do so and would provide additional power to supply to loads that need power.
Regarding claim 4, Roy teaches an external-load-device controller (130) that controls the electric equipment (i.e. external communication equipment; Col. 6, lines 13-25) mounted on the external load device (100), the external-load-device controller being unsupported by the base member (vehicle).
Claim(s) 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muramatsu et al. (2019/0089086) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Maruyama et al. (2005/0104314). Muramatsu teaches the engine-driven-DC-supply unit as described above. Maruyama teaches a similar environment (Abstract; i.e. a vehicle body and various housings inside the vehicle body) to that of Muramatsu.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Muramatsu teaches the controller ([0051]) has both an engine control function of controlling the engine ([0041], [0044] to control the generator) and an electric-power-conversion-controlling function of controlling the electric power converter ([0051]), and is housed in the controller-housing case (as described above), and
the engine-driven-DC-supply unit further comprises a controller-housing-case supporter (310 and/or housing around 314) supporting the controller-housing case (housing around 28)(Fig. 1).
Muramatsu fails to explicitly teach the use of elastic members between any of their housing cases and their housing case supporters. Maruyama teaches a similar vehicle body to that of Muramatsu. Maruyama teaches the idea of using elastic members between housing cases and housing case supporters ([0005]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to either have or not have elastic members connected between housing cases and housing case supporters, since it has been shown in Muramatsu and Maruyama that either way is known in the art and it is a matter of design choice as to which way each vehicle owner/manufacturer prefers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DRU M PARRIES whose telephone number is (571)272-8542. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Thursday from 9:00am to 6:00pm. The examiner can also be reached on alternate Fridays.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Rexford Barnie, can be reached on 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 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).
DMP
12/9/2025
/DANIEL CAVALLARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836