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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on 8/29/2024, and 12/5/2024 are being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species 1, in the reply filed on 6/2/2026 is acknowledged.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-25 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 7 and 13 of copending Application No. 18/746,744 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Application No. 18/818,861
Co-pending Application No. 18/746,744
1. (original) A wireless power receiver comprising: a wireless power transfer coil; a rectifier that receives an AC voltage induced in the wireless power transfer coil by a wireless power transmitter and generates a DC output voltage therefrom;
1. (original) A wireless power receiver comprising: a wireless power transfer coil; a rectifier that receives an AC voltage induced in the wireless power transfer coil by a wireless power transmitter and generates a DC output voltage therefrom;
load modulation circuitry; and control circuitry that operates the rectifier to power a load coupled thereto and operates the load modulation circuitry to communicate with the wireless power transmitter
load modulation circuitry; and control circuitry that operates the rectifier to power a load coupled thereto and operates the load modulation circuitry to communicate with the wireless power transmitter by selectively altering power drawn from the wireless power transfer coil in accordance with an amplitude shift keying modulation scheme employing differential Manchester encoding,
by selectively altering power drawn from the wireless power transfer coil in accordance with an amplitude shift keying modulation scheme having a plurality of modulation depths.
the modulation scheme employed by the control circuitry further comprising: initially employing a first modulation depth to first and second symbols communicated to the wireless power transmitter; and responsive to a communication failure, increasing a modulation depth associated with the first symbols to a higher modulation depth while maintaining a first modulation depth for the second symbols; wherein increasing a modulation depth associated with the first symbols to a higher modulation depth while maintaining a first modulation depth for the second symbols reduces power consumption associated with the modulation scheme.
11. (original) A method of communicating data from a wireless power receiver to a wireless power transmitter via load modulation, the method being performed by control circuitry of the wireless power receiver operating load modulation circuitry of the wireless power receiver by;
7. (original) A method of communicating data from a wireless power receiver to a wireless power transmitter via load modulation, the method being performed by control circuitry of the wireless power receiver operating load modulation circuitry of the wireless power receiver by
initially employing a first modulation depth to symbols communicated to the wireless power transmitter; responsive to a communication failure, increasing a modulation depth associated with the symbols, thereby improving communication reliability;
initially employing a first modulation depth to first and second symbols communicated to the wireless power transmitter; and responsive to a communication failure, increasing a modulation depth associated with the first symbols
and responsive to an absence of communication failure, decreasing the modulation depth associated with the symbols, thereby improving operating efficiency.
to a higher modulation depth while maintaining a first modulation depth for the second symbols.
17. (original) A wireless power receiver comprising: a wireless power transfer coil; a rectifier that receives an AC voltage induced in the wireless power transfer coil by a wireless power transmitter and generates a DC output voltage therefrom;
13. (original) A wireless power receiver comprising: a wireless power transfer coil; a rectifier that receives an AC voltage induced in the wireless power transfer coil by a wireless power transmitter and generates a DC output voltage therefrom;
load modulation circuitry; and control circuitry that operates the rectifier to power a load coupled thereto and operates the load modulation circuitry to communicate with the wireless power transmitter by selectively altering power drawn from the wireless power transfer coil in accordance with a modulation scheme,
load modulation circuitry; and control circuitry that operates the rectifier to power a load coupled thereto and operates the load modulation circuitry to communicate with the wireless power transmitter by selectively altering power drawn from the wireless power transfer coil in accordance with a modulation scheme,
the modulation scheme employed by the control circuitry further comprising: initially employing a first modulation depth to symbols communicated to the wireless power transmitter; responsive to a communication failure, increasing a modulation depth associated with the symbols, thereby improving communication reliability; and responsive to an absence of communication failure, decreasing the modulation depth associated with the symbols, thereby improving operating efficiency.
the modulation scheme employed by the control circuitry further comprising: initially employing a first modulation depth to first and second symbols communicated to the wireless power transmitter; and responsive to a communication failure, increasing a modulation depth associated with the first symbols to a higher modulation depth while maintaining a first modulation depth for the second symbols.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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) 1, 2, 8, 10, 11, 16, 17, 19, 20, and 22-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by STARING ANTONIUS ADRIAAN MARIA (“Staring”) (EP-4195453-A1).
Staring discloses:
In regard to claim 1: (original)
A wireless power receiver (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105) comprising: a wireless power transfer coil (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 107); a rectifier (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105 and Par. [0069] i.e. rectifier not shown) that receives an AC voltage induced in the wireless power transfer coil (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 107 & Par. [0069]) by a wireless power transmitter (Fig. 1 Item 101) and generates a DC output voltage therefrom (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105 and Par. [0069] i.e. DC voltage generated for a load); load modulation circuitry (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0077] i.e. vary the resonance frequency); and control circuitry that operates the rectifier to power a load coupled thereto (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 501 and 505 and Par. [0069] i.e. rectifier not shown) and operates the load modulation circuitry (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0077]) to communicate with the wireless power transmitter (Fig. 1 Item 101) by selectively altering power drawn from the wireless power transfer coil (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 107) in accordance with an amplitude shift keying modulation scheme (Figs. 1, 5 & 6 Items 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0101-0102] i.e. on/off in out switching modulation of the load ) having a plurality of modulation depths (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0144] i.e. second communication mode may use Manchester encoding, and [0189-0191] i.e. plurality of modulation depth).
In regard to claim 2: (original)
The wireless power receiver of claim 1 wherein the amplitude shift keying modulation scheme comprises: initially employing an initial modulation depth to symbols communicated to the wireless power transmitter (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth); and responsive to a communication failure, increasing a modulation depth associated with the symbols, thereby improving communication reliability (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth).
9. (withdrawn) Not examined on the merits.
In regard to claim 8: (original)
The wireless power receiver of claim 1 wherein the plurality of modulation depths (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0144] i.e. second communication mode may use Manchester encoding, and [0189-0191] i.e. plurality of modulation depth) are selectively applied to symbols more susceptible to channel interference (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105 and Han Par. [0033] i.e. adjustable modulation depths through the changing of the amplitude value for binary “1” and/or “0” {Further it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233}).
In regard to claim 10: (original)
The wireless power receiver of claim 1 wherein the load modulation circuitry (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0077]) includes one or more controllable capacitances connected to an AC side of the rectifier (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0102] i.e. capacitor not shown used on the AC side of the rectifier).
In regard to claim 11: (original)
A method of communicating data from a wireless power receiver (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105) to a wireless power transmitter (Fig. 1 Item 101) via load modulation (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0077] i.e. vary the resonance frequency), the method being performed by control circuitry of the wireless power receiver (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 501, 509) operating load modulation circuitry of the wireless power receiver (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 501, 509 and Par. [0077]) by: initially employing a first modulation depth to symbols communicated to the wireless power transmitter (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth); responsive to a communication failure, increasing a modulation depth associated with the symbols (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth), thereby improving communication reliability (1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Par. [0195] i.e. more reliable communication); and responsive to an absence of communication failure (1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Par. [0195] i.e. b) may switch to shorter without or before a failure has been detected), decreasing the modulation depth associated with the symbols, thereby improving operating efficiency (1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Par. [0195] i.e. b) may switch to shorter without or before a failure has been detected).
In regard to claim 16: (original)
The method of claim 11 wherein increased modulation depths (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0144] i.e. second communication mode may use Manchester encoding, and [0189-0191] i.e. plurality of modulation depth) are selectively applied to symbols more susceptible to channel interference (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105 and Han Par. [0033] i.e. adjustable modulation depths through the changing of the amplitude value for binary “1” and/or “0”).
Further it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
In regard to claim 17: (original)
A wireless power receiver (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105) comprising: a wireless power transfer coil (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 107); a rectifier (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105 and Par. [0069] i.e. rectifier not shown) that receives an AC voltage induced in the wireless power transfer coil (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 107 & Par. [0069]) by a wireless power transmitter (Fig. 1 Item 101) and generates a DC output voltage there from (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105 and Par. [0069] i.e. DC voltage generated for a load); load modulation circuitry (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0077] i.e. vary the resonance frequency); and control circuitry that operates the rectifier to power a load coupled thereto (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 501 and 505 and Par. [0069] i.e. rectifier not shown) and operates the load modulation circuitry (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0077]) to communicate with the wireless power transmitter (Fig. 1 Item 101) by selectively altering power drawn from the wireless power transfer coil (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 107) in accordance with a modulation scheme (Figs. 1, 5 & 6 Items 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0101-0102] i.e. on/off in out switching modulation of the load ), the modulation scheme employed by the control circuitry (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 501) further comprising: initially employing a first modulation depth to symbols communicated to the wireless power transmitter (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth); responsive to a communication failure, increasing a modulation depth associated with the symbols (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth), thereby improving communication reliability (1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Par. [0195] i.e. more reliable communication); and responsive to an absence of communication failure (1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Par. [0195] i.e. b) may switch to shorter without or before a failure has been detected), decreasing the modulation depth associated with the symbols, thereby improving operating efficiency (1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Par. [0195] i.e. b) may switch to shorter without or before a failure has been detected).
In regard to claim 19: (original)
The wireless power receiver of claim 17 wherein the symbols communicated to the wireless power transmitter (Fig. 1 Item 101) are encoded with a differential Manchester encoding scheme (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0144] i.e. second communication mode may use Manchester encoding, and [0189-0191] i.e. plurality of modulation depth).
In regard to claim 20: (original)
The wireless power receiver of claim 19 wherein increased modulation depths (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0144] i.e. second communication mode may use Manchester encoding, and [0189-0191] i.e. plurality of modulation depth) are selectively applied to symbols more susceptible to channel interference (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105 and Han Par. [0033] i.e. adjustable modulation depths through the changing of the amplitude value for binary “1” and/or “0”).
Further it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
21. (withdrawn) Not examined on the merits.
In regard to claim 22: (original)
The wireless power receiver of claim 17 wherein the load modulation circuitry (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0077]) includes one or more controllable capacitances connected to an AC side of the rectifier (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0102] i.e. capacitor not shown used on the AC side of the rectifier).
In regard to claim 23: (original)
The wireless power receiver of claim 22 wherein the one or more controllable capacitances includes at least one communication capacitor selectively couplable to ground by a communication switch (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509 and Par. [0102] i.e. capacitor not shown used on the AC side of the rectifier to be switched on and off for modulation of signals).
In regard to claim 24: (original)
The wireless power receiver (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105) of claim 23 wherein the one or more controllable capacitances (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509, 503 and Par. [0102] i.e. capacitor not shown coupled with 503 resonance capacitor) includes: a capacitor bank including a first communication capacitor (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 503) and one or more additional communication capacitors selectively couplable in parallel with the first communication capacitor by one or more switches corresponding to the one or more additional communication capacitors (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509, 503 and Par. [0102] i.e. capacitor not shown coupled with 503 resonance capacitor by switches); and a communication switch that selectively couples the first communication capacitors and any selectively paralleled communication capacitors to ground (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 105, 509, 503 and Par. [0102] i.e. capacitor not shown coupled with 503 by switch to control varying resonance frequency);.
25. (withdrawn) Not examined on the merits.
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 (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.
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) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STARING ANTONIUS ADRIAAN MARIA (“Staring”) (EP-4195453-A1).
In regard to claim 3: (original)
Staring discloses the wireless power receiver of claim 2 wherein increasing the modulation depth associated with the symbols comprises incrementally increasing the modulation depth responsive to a plurality of communication failures (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] and [0193-0195] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth interpreted by Examiner “further communication failure” occurring at any point throughout the cycle of modulation and demodulation that occurs over time).
However, Staring is arguably vague in its disclosure of incrementally increasing the modulation depth.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the known system of Staring adjust the modulation depth in a greater or lesser fashion incrementally as this would ensure the discovering of the optimum value (i.e. depth), and thereby since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272,205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
In regard to claim 4: (original)
Modified Staring further teaches the wireless power receiver of claim 3 wherein the amplitude shift keying modulation scheme further comprises: responsive to an absence of communication failure, decreasing the modulation depth associated with the symbols, thereby improving operating efficiency (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] and [0193-0195] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth interpreted by Examiner “further communication failure” occurring at any point throughout the cycle of modulation and demodulation that occurs over time).
In regard to claim 5: (original)
Modified Staring further teaches the wireless power receiver of claim 4 wherein decreasing the modulation depth associated with the symbols comprises incrementally decreasing the modulation depth responsive to a plurality of absences of communication failures (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] and [0193-0195] i.e. suspected failures as opposed to actual failures).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STARING ANTONIUS ADRIAAN MARIA (“Staring”) (EP-4195453-A1) in view of Kwon et al. (US 2019/0312468).
In regard to claim 6: (original)
Modified Staring further teaches the wireless power receiver of claim 4.
However, Modified Staring does not explicitly disclose wherein an absence of communication failure is determined with reference to at least one of a missed response counter and a modulation timer.
Kwon teaches a controller capable of determining when a communication error count exceeds a predetermined communication error reference value (Fig. 9 Item S1403 and Par. [0252].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the use of a counter to track communication errors as taught by Kwon with the known wireless power and transfer system of Staring as doing would have yielded the predictable results of increased efficiency and safety.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STARING ANTONIUS ADRIAAN MARIA (“Staring”) (EP-4195453-A1) in view of Kwon et al. (US 2019/0312468).
In regard to claim 7: (original)
Staring discloses the wireless power receiver of claim 2 wherein a communication failure is determined with reference to a series of missed responses.
However, Staring does not explicitly disclose wherein a communication failure is determined with reference to a series of missed responses indicated by a counter.
Kwon teaches a controller capable of determining when a communication error count exceeds a predetermined communication error reference value (Fig. 9 Item S1403 and Par. [0252].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the use of a counter to track communication errors as taught by Kwon with the known wireless power and transfer system of Staring as doing would have yielded the predictable results of increased efficiency and safety.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STARING ANTONIUS ADRIAAN MARIA (“Staring”) (EP-4195453-A1).
In regard to claim 12: (original)
Staring discloses the method of claim 11 wherein increasing the modulation depth associated with the symbols comprises incrementally increasing the modulation depth responsive to a plurality of communication failures (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] and [0193-0195] i.e. increase and or decrease as well as suspected failures as opposed to actual failures).
However, Staring is arguably vague in its disclosure of incrementally increasing the modulation depth.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the known system of Staring adjust the modulation depth in a greater or lesser fashion incrementally as this would ensure the discovering of the optimum value (i.e. depth), and thereby since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272,205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STARING ANTONIUS ADRIAAN MARIA (“Staring”) (EP-4195453-A1).
In regard to claim 13: (original)
Staring discloses the method of claim 11 wherein decreasing the modulation depth associated with the symbols comprises incrementally decreasing the modulation depth responsive to a plurality of absences of communication failures (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] and [0193-0195] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth interpreted by Examiner “further communication failure” occurring at any point throughout the cycle of modulation and demodulation that occurs over time).
However, Staring is arguably vague in its disclosure of incrementally decreasing the modulation depth.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the known system of Staring adjust the modulation depth in a greater or lesser fashion incrementally as this would ensure the discovering of the optimum value (i.e. depth), and thereby since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272,205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STARING ANTONIUS ADRIAAN MARIA (“Staring”) (EP-4195453-A1) in view of Kwon et al. (US 2019/0312468).
In regard to claim 14: (original)
Staring discloses the method of claim 11 wherein an absence of communication failure is determined with reference to a series of missed responses.
However, Staring does not explicitly disclose wherein a communication failure is determined with reference to at least one of a missed response counter and a modulation timer.
Kwon teaches a controller capable of determining when a communication error count exceeds or does not exceed a predetermined communication error reference value (Fig. 9 Item S1403 and Par. [0252].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the use of a counter to track communication errors as taught by Kwon with the known wireless power and transfer system of Staring as doing would have yielded the predictable results of increased efficiency and safety.
Further it has been held that omission of an element and its function in a combination where the remaining elements perform the same functions as before involves only routine skill in the art. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STARING ANTONIUS ADRIAAN MARIA (“Staring”) (EP-4195453-A1) in view of Kwon et al. (US 2019/0312468).
In regard to claim 15: (original)
Staring discloses the method of claim 11 wherein a communication failure is determined with reference to a series of missed responses.
However Staring does not explicitly disclose wherein a communication failure is determined with reference to a series of missed responses indicated by a counter.
Kwon teaches a controller capable of determining when a communication error count exceeds a predetermined communication error reference value (Fig. 9 Item S1403 and Par. [0252].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the use of a counter to track communication errors as taught by Kwon with the known wireless power and transfer system of Staring as doing would have yielded the predictable results of increased efficiency and safety.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STARING ANTONIUS ADRIAAN MARIA (“Staring”) (EP-4195453-A1).
In regard to claim 18: (original)
Staring discloses the wireless power receiver (Figs. 1 & 5 Item 105) of claim 17 wherein the modulation scheme employed by the control circuitry further comprises: incrementally increasing the modulation depth responsive to a plurality of communication failures (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] and [0193-0195] i.e. controlled adaptation of modulation depth interpreted by Examiner “further communication failure” occurring at any point throughout the cycle of modulation and demodulation that occurs over time); and incrementally decreasing the modulation depth responsive to a plurality of absences of communication failures (Figs. 1 & 5 Items 101, 501, 513, 515, 511 and 509 & Pars . [0189-0191] and [0193-0195] i.e. increase and or decrease as well as suspected failures as opposed to actual failures).
However, Staring is arguably vague in its disclosure of incrementally increasing the modulation depth, as well as incrementally decreasing the modulation depth.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the known system of Staring adjust the modulation depth in a greater or lesser fashion incrementally as this would ensure the discovering of the optimum value (i.e. depth), and thereby since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272,205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached form PTO-892 as well as some references of note below:
Huang et al. (US 2023/0084847) showing an Alternating communication for wireless power transfer.
Peralta et al. (US 11,489,555) showing a wireless power transmitter for high fidelity communications with amplitude shift keying.
Teo (US 10,862,719) showing a method and apparatus for determining data of ASK signal and wireless power transmitter using the same.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J WARMFLASH whose telephone number is (571)270-1434. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-6PM EST M-Th.
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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached at (571)2703684. 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.
MW
8/18/2026
/RYAN JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights