CTNF 18/842,219 CTNF 82155 DETAILED ACTION This is responsive to the application filed 28 August 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending and considered below. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In line 1 claim 16 recites the limitation “The electronic device”. It is unclear if the limitation refers back to the electronic device of line 1 or the one of line 8 in parent claim 15. Claims 17-20 suffer from a similar deficiency and are likewise rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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. Further, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In claims 1 and 15, the limitations providing, via a speaker of a voice integration system , an audio inquiry requesting audio input from a user, the audio inquiry relating to one or more charging options for a rechargeable battery of an electronic device; receiving, from the user and at a microphone of the voice integration system , the requested audio input, the requested audio input selecting at least one of the one or more charging options; and causing the rechargeable battery of the electronic device to be charged according to the selected one of the one or more charging options , as drafted, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting a “speaker of a voice integration system”, a “rechargeable battery of an electronic device” and a “microphone of the voice integration system” (claim 1) and an “electronic device comprising: one or more speakers configured to output audio; one or more microphones configured to capture audio; a network communication module configured to transmit data; and a processor” and a “rechargeable battery of an electronic device” (claim 15) nothing in the claims precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind. For example, a person may provide an audio inquiry requesting audio input from a user, the audio inquiry relating to one or more charging options for a rechargeable battery of an electronic device (e.g. a first person may ask a second person for a battery charging preference); and receive, from the user, the requested audio input, the requested audio input selecting at least one of the one or more charging options (e.g. the second person may utter her preference). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing personal behavior, relationships or interactions between people but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims recite the additional elements – a “speaker of a voice integration system”, a “rechargeable battery of an electronic device” and a “microphone of the voice integration system” (claim 1) and an “electronic device comprising: one or more speakers configured to output audio; one or more microphones configured to capture audio; a network communication module configured to transmit data; and a processor” and a “rechargeable battery of an electronic device” (claim 15) which are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic processors performing generic computer functions) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. The claims also recite the additional elements “causing the rechargeable battery of the electronic device to be charged according to the selected one of the one or more charging options”. The claims do not impose any limits on how the electronic device is charged based on the charging options. In other words, the claims recite only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claims fail to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished. These limitations therefore represent extra-solution activity because they are mere nominal or tangential addition to the claims. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are therefore directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As stated above, the claims recite the additional limitations of a “speaker of a voice integration system”, a “rechargeable battery of an electronic device” and a “microphone of the voice integration system” (claim 1) and an “electronic device comprising: one or more speakers configured to output audio; one or more microphones configured to capture audio; a network communication module configured to transmit data; and a processor” and a “rechargeable battery of an electronic device” (claim 15). However, these are recited at a high level of generality and are recited as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications (see Applicant’s specification [0054], [0056]-[0057] and [0061]). Generic computer components recited as performing generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities amount to no more than implementing the abstract idea with a computerized system. The claims also recite the additional elements “causing the rechargeable battery of the electronic device to be charged according to the selected one of the one or more charging options”. The claims do not impose any limits on how the electronic device is charged based on the charging options. In other words, the claims recite only the idea of a solution or outcome i.e., the claims fail to recite details of how a solution to a problem is accomplished. These limitations represent the extra-solution activity of charging a battery according to an option which is well-understood, routine and conventional activity. Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims are not patent eligible. The dependent claims, when analyzed as a whole, are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitations fail to establish that the claims are not directed to an abstract idea. The dependent claims recite: further comprising: determining, prior to providing the audio inquiry, a charge level of the rechargeable battery of the electronic device; and providing, based on the determined charge level of the rechargeable battery, an audio alert via the speaker at the voice integration system, the audio alert pertaining to the charge level for the rechargeable battery; wherein the determined charge level for the rechargeable battery is near or less than a first threshold charge level, the first threshold charge level being associated with a battery state of charge at which the rechargeable battery experiences a greater degree of degradation due to a high depth of discharge; wherein the determined charge level of the rechargeable battery is near or greater than a second threshold charge level, the second threshold charge level being associated with a battery state of charge at which the rechargeable battery experiences a greater degree of degradation due to a low depth of discharge; further comprising determining, prior to providing the audio inquiry requesting audio input from the user, a proximity of the user to a charging unit configured to charge the rechargeable battery of the electronic device, and wherein providing the audio inquiry provides the audio inquiry to the user within the proximity; wherein the requested audio input is determined to select a desired charge level for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device based on voice recognition; wherein the requested audio input selects one or more of a desired charge start time, a desired charge finish time, a selected charge rate, or a desired charge duration; further comprising: determining a schedule of the user, the schedule indicative of one or more events, event locations, or event durations; and determining a suggested charge level for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device based on the determined schedule of the user, and wherein providing the audio inquiry requesting audio input from the user is based on the suggested charge level for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device; further comprising: determining, based at least in part on the determined schedule of the user, another electronic device associated with the determined scheduled of the user; determining a suggested battery charge level for the other electronic device based on the determined schedule of the user; and providing another audio inquiry requesting audio input from the user, the other audio inquiry relating to another one or more charging options for another rechargeable battery of the other electronic device; wherein the causing the rechargeable battery of the electronic device to be charged includes directing, through a network communication module associated with the voice integration system and configured to communicate with the electronic device or a charging unit configured to charge the rechargeable battery of the electronic device, the electronic device or the charging unit to charge the rechargeable battery according to the selected one of the one or more charging options; wherein the directing causes the electronic device or the charging unit to charge at a variable charge rate, the variable charge rate including a slow charge rate, a medium charge rate, or a quick charge rate; further comprising providing an audio message, the audio message including information pertaining to benefits or consequences associated with the selected one of the one or more charging options for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device; wherein the audio message further includes information pertaining to a battery state of health or a battery state of charge for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device; further comprising maintaining, after charging the rechargeable battery of the electronic device to a desired charge level based on the selected one of the one or more charging options, the desired charge level based on a self-discharge rate. The additional recited limitations further narrow the steps of the independent claims without however providing “a practical application of” or "significantly more than" the underlying “Mental Processes” abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 6-7, 10-13, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Duncan et al. (US 2016/0111905) . Claim 1: Duncan discloses a method comprising: providing, via a speaker of a voice integration system, an audio inquiry requesting audio input from a user, the audio inquiry relating to one or more charging options for a rechargeable battery of an electronic device (“ determine a plurality of different options for charging an energy storage device, including determining a predicted impact on the overall life of the energy storage device for each of the plurality of options; provide the plurality of options for charging the energy storage device to the user interface device, each of the plurality of options including an indication of the predicted impact on the overall life of the energy storage device ”, [0002], see also “ Audio input and output device 18 can provide audio input and output features and can include a microphone, speaker, or similar device to enable receipt of voice commands from a user, enable audible outputs to be provided to a user, and so on ”, [0030]); receiving, from the user and at a microphone of the voice integration system, the requested audio input, the requested audio input selecting at least one of the one or more charging options (“ receive a user input identifying a user selection of one of the plurality of options ”, [0002], see also “ Audio input and output device 18 can provide audio input and output features and can include a microphone, speaker, or similar device to enable receipt of voice commands from a user, enable audible outputs to be provided to a user, and so on ”, [0030]); and causing the rechargeable battery of the electronic device to be charged according to the selected one of the one or more charging options (“ charge the energy storage device in accordance with the selected option ”, [0002]). Claim 6: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 1, wherein the requested audio input is determined to select a desired charge level for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device based on voice recognition ([0030]). Claim 7: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 1, wherein the requested audio input selects one or more of a desired charge start time, a desired charge finish time, a selected charge rate, or a desired charge duration ([0045]). Claim 10: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 1, wherein the causing the rechargeable battery of the electronic device to be charged includes directing, through a network communication module ( connection port 22, charging cord 24 ) associated with the voice integration system and configured to communicate with the electronic device or a charging unit configured to charge the rechargeable battery of the electronic device, the electronic device or the charging unit to charge the rechargeable battery according to the selected one of the one or more charging options [0029]. Claim 11: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 10, wherein the directing causes the electronic device or the charging unit to charge at a variable charge rate, the variable charge rate including a slow charge rate, a medium charge rate, or a quick charge rate [0043]. Claim 12: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 1, further comprising providing an audio message, the audio message including information pertaining to benefits or consequences ( storage device life ) associated with the selected one of the one or more charging options for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device ([0043], see [0030] for audio outputs). Claim 13: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 12, wherein the audio message further includes information pertaining to a battery state of health or a battery state of charge for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device (“ provides a charge time 72, a use time 74, and a storage device life 76 ”, [0048], see [0030] for audio outputs). Claims 15 and 20: Duncan discloses an electronic device comprising: one or more speakers configured to output audio; one or more microphones configured to capture audio; a network communication module configured to transmit data; and a processor ([0028], see also [0033]) configured to perform the steps of process claims 1 and 6 as shown above . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2-3 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan et al. (US 2016/0111905) in view of Maheshwari et al. (US 2018/0082570) . Claim 2: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 1, further comprising: determining, prior to providing the audio inquiry, a charge level ( current state of charge) of the rechargeable battery of the electronic device ([0040], see also [0061]) but does not explicitly disclose providing, based on the determined charge level of the rechargeable battery, an audio alert via the speaker at the voice integration system, the audio alert pertaining to the charge level for the rechargeable battery. In an analogous art similarly determining a charge level of a rechargeable battery, Maheshwari discloses providing, based on the determined charge level of the rechargeable battery, an audio alert via a speaker, the audio alert pertaining to the charge level for the rechargeable battery (“ an alert is generated prior to one or more of the future events in response to a current battery level of the mobile device being less than the battery charging threshold … alert 312 may be presented to the user by way of an audio alert ”, [0032]). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventio to combine the references to yield the predictable result of providing, based on Duncan’s determined charge level of the rechargeable battery, an audio alert via the speaker at the voice integration system, the audio alert pertaining to the charge level for the rechargeable battery in order to notify the user that the battery needs charging before a specific event (see, Maheshwari, [0023]). Claim 3: Duncan in view of Maheshwari discloses the method as described in claim 2, wherein the determined charge level for the rechargeable battery is near or less than a first threshold charge level, the first threshold charge level being associated with a battery state of charge at which the rechargeable battery experiences a greater degree of degradation due to a high depth of discharge (Maheshwari, [0032]). Claims 16-17: Duncan in view of Maheshwari discloses an electronic device comprising: one or more speakers configured to output audio; one or more microphones configured to capture audio; a network communication module configured to transmit data; and a processor (Duncan, [0028], see also [0033]) configured to perform the steps of process claims 2-3 as shown above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan et al. (US 2016/0111905) in view of Maheshwari et al. (US 2018/0082570) and Kawagoe et al. (US 2003/0146738) . Claim 4: Duncan in view of Maheshwari discloses the method as described in claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the determined charge level of the rechargeable battery is near or greater than a second threshold charge level, the second threshold charge level being associated with a battery state of charge at which the rechargeable battery experiences a greater degree of degradation due to a low depth of discharge. In an analogous art similarly providing, based on a determined charge level of a rechargeable battery, an alert to a user (“ When an effect that the secondary battery 300 is put into an overcharge condition is notified to a user by any notification arrangement, the user decides that the charging is completed. Thereafter, the user removes the charger from the external connection terminals ”, [0031]), Kawagoe discloses wherein the determined charge level of the rechargeable battery is near or greater than a second threshold charge level, the second threshold charge level being associated with a battery state of charge at which the rechargeable battery experiences a greater degree of degradation due to a low depth of discharge (“ the overcharge prevention mechanism of the secondary battery protection circuit 200' is set with an overcharge detection threshold voltage Vth(oc). More specifically, the overcharge prevention mechanism compares the battery voltage Vcc with the overcharge detection threshold voltage Vth(oc) during charge. When the battery voltage Vcc is higher than the overcharge detection threshold voltage Vth(oc), the overcharge prevention mechanism judges that the secondary battery 300 is put into an overcharge condition to produce an overcharge detected signal ”, [0022]). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventio to combine the references to yield the predictable result of wherein Duncan’s determined charge level of the rechargeable battery is near or greater than a second threshold charge level, the second threshold charge level being associated with a battery state of charge at which the rechargeable battery experiences a greater degree of degradation due to a low depth of discharge in order to alert the user that the battery is overcharging and should be removed from the charger (see, “ When an effect that the secondary battery 300 is put into an overcharge condition is notified to a user by any notification arrangement, the user decides that the charging is completed. Thereafter, the user removes the charger from the external connection terminals ”, Kawagoe, [0031]). Claim 18: Duncan in view of Kawagoe discloses an electronic device comprising: one or more speakers configured to output audio; one or more microphones configured to capture audio; a network communication module configured to transmit data; and a processor (Duncan, [0028], see also [0033]) configured to perform the steps of process claim 4 as shown above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan et al. (US 2016/0111905) in view of Moore et al. (US 2014/0095091) . Claim 5: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose determining, prior to providing the audio inquiry requesting audio input from the user, a proximity of the user to a charging unit configured to charge the rechargeable battery of the electronic device, and wherein providing the audio inquiry provides the audio inquiry to the user within the proximity. In an analogous art similarly charging a rechargeable battery of an electronic device, Moore discloses determining, prior to providing a notification to a user, a proximity of the user to a charging unit configured to charge the rechargeable battery of the electronic device, and wherein providing the audio inquiry provides the audio inquiry to the user within the proximity (“ providing notifications indicating when a device is or is not near a recharger and/or one or more batteries require recharging; and intelligent modifying (by a user utilizing, e.g., predefined rules, or server-directed instruction) device operation based upon battery level, proximity to a recharging station ”, [0007], see also “ As to location-based notifications, notifications may be sent out indicating, e.g., when the device 102 is near a recharging station (if the rechargeable battery requires, could use recharging, etc.), when the rechargeable battery needs recharging ”, [0081]). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventio to combine the references to yield the predictable result of determining, prior to providing Duncan’s audio inquiry requesting audio input from the user, a proximity of the user to a charging unit configured to charge the rechargeable battery of the electronic device, and wherein providing the audio inquiry provides the audio inquiry to the user within the proximity in order alert the user that the battery need recharging when the user is close to a charger where the battery may be recharged (see, Moore, [0081]). Claim 19: Duncan in view of Moore discloses an electronic device comprising: one or more speakers configured to output audio; one or more microphones configured to capture audio; a network communication module configured to transmit data; and a processor (Duncan, [0028], see also [0033]) configured to perform the steps of process claim 5 as shown above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan et al. (US 2016/0111905) in view of Matsumura et al. (US 2022/0224135) . Claim 8: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose determining a schedule of the user, the schedule indicative of one or more events, event locations, or event durations; and determining a suggested charge level for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device based on the determined schedule of the user, and wherein providing the audio inquiry requesting audio input from the user is based on the suggested charge level for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device. In an analogous art similarly providing an inquiry requesting input from a user in a rechargeable battery charging system (“suggest a charger integrated circuit (IC) to change the setting instead of changing it directly. In some embodiments, microcontroller 102, processor 103, and/or SW may notify a user that charging setting is changed as indicated by block 407. SW or system may request an approval from the user before changing the settings ”, [0045]), Matsumura discloses determining a schedule of the user, the schedule indicative of one or more events, event locations, or event durations; and determining a suggested charge level for the rechargeable battery based on the determined schedule of the user, and wherein providing the inquiry requesting input from the user is based on the suggested charge level for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device (“ To detect if user is in a situation which needs fast charging, microcontroller 102 and/or processor 103 analyzes one or more parameters. For example, microcontroller 102 and/or processor 103 analyzes user's location (e.g. station, airport, cruise ship, coffee shop, restaurant, gas station, campground, etc.) to determine whether fast charging is needed. The one or more parameters may also include user's near-future schedule (e.g., travel, departure, meeting, any events that need battery power, etc.) ”, [0028], see also “ Once the need for fast charging is detected, microcontroller 102 and/or processor 103 determines whether charger 107 can provide enough power to support both system and battery fast charging. If charger 107 cannot sustain fast charging to support both the system and battery fast charging, microcontroller 102 and/or processor 103 turns down system power (e.g. reduce display brightness) and starts fast charging with available charger power to a sufficient charge level (e.g., 60%). In some embodiments, when microcontroller 102 and/or processor 103 determines that charger 107 can provide enough power to support both system and battery fast charging, system starts fast charging to a sufficient charge level ”, [0029]). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventio to combine the references to yield the predictable result of determining a schedule of the user, the schedule indicative of one or more events, event locations, or event durations; and determining a suggested charge level for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device based on the determined schedule of the user, and wherein providing the audio inquiry requesting audio input from the user is based on the suggested charge level for the rechargeable battery of the electronic device in order to fast charge the battery, which degrades the battery, only when necessary (see “ if user is at an airport (location) working on documents on a laptop with internet connection and is about to depart, such as in 30 minutes, (near-future schedule) but battery fuel gauge shows 10% (remaining battery capacity), then microcontroller 102 and/or processor 103 detects that and concludes that the user needs fast charging ”, Matsumura, [0029]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duncan et al. (US 2016/0111905) in view of Beaman et al. (US 3,795,818) . Claim 14: Duncan discloses the method as described in claim 1, but does not disclose maintaining, after charging the rechargeable battery of the electronic device to a desired charge level based on the selected one of the one or more charging options, the desired charge level based on a self-discharge rate. In an analogous art similarly charging a rechargeable battery of an electronic device, Beaman discloses maintaining, after charging the rechargeable battery of the electronic device to a desired charge level, the desired charge level based on a self-discharge rate (“ Stationary batteries have a self-discharge rate and, accordingly, must be periodically recharged or continuously trickle charged to maintain a desired charge level ”, col. 1, lines 35-38). It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed inventio to combine the references to yield the predictable result of maintaining, after charging Duncan’s rechargeable battery of the electronic device to a desired charge level based on the selected one of the one or more charging options, the desired charge level based on a self-discharge rate in order to preserve charge in idle batteries which loose charge at a self-discharge rate (see, Beaman, col. 1, lines 35-38) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Das et al. (US 2014/0184163) discloses receiving, in a controller, a user profile for usage of an electronic device, the electronic device at least partially powered by a battery and implementing, in the controller, a selected charge routine from a plurality of charge routines for the battery based at least in part on the user profile. Todasco (US 2019/0109475) discloses a charger device may include a coupling component configured to deliver power for charging user devices and a wireless interface configured to broadcast wireless signals. The coupling component may include a connector that may be plugged into a user device or an inductive coil to be inductively coupled to a user device. The charger device may determine whether the coupling component is coupled to a user device and transmit via the wireless interface an “available” signal indicating the charger device is available in response to determining the coupling component is not coupled. The user device may provide a notification to the user based, at least in part, on receiving the “available” signal. The user device may provide the notification further based on other information, such as activity of a user detected by the user device, a geolocation determined by the user device, or information received from a service provider. Owen et al. (US 2020/0303938) discloses an electronic device which includes a battery and a battery management system. The battery management system is configured to derive a predicted battery demand based on observed usage patterns to predictively charge the battery to healthily accommodate the predicted battery demand. The battery management system is further configured to determine a predicted deviating battery demand based on a contextual signal. The predicted deviating battery demand differing from the predicted battery demand. The battery management system is further configured to predictively charge the battery to healthily accommodate the predicted deviating battery demand. Huang et al. (US 2021/0399568) discloses an electronic device, where after the electronic device is coupled to a charging device, the electronic device is configured to obtain a current time, charge the battery in a first mode in response to the current time is in a first time period, in response to the current time is in a second time period and after the battery level is less than a preset threshold, charging the battery in the first mode; in response to the current time is in a second time period and after the battery level is greater than or equal to the preset threshold, charging the battery in a second mode, wherein the second time period is after the first time period is subtracted from a whole day time period, and the preset threshold is less than a battery level when the battery is fully charged. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL G NEWAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1058. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm EST. 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, Daniel Washburn can be reached at 571-272-5551. 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. /SAMUEL G NEWAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 2 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 3 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 4 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 5 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 6 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 7 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 8 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 9 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 10 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 11 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 12 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 13 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 14 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 15 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 16 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 17 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 18 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 19 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 21 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 22 Art Unit: 2657 Application/Control Number: 18/842,219 Page 23 Art Unit: 2657
Prosecution Insights