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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected claims, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/7/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-10 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.
Regarding Claims 1 and 10
The claim term “near” is a relative term.
The claim when taken as a whole is indefinite in that it references plural imaginary non-physical components in an attempt to define the physical structure of the system. Namely said “first center” and “reference point”, neither which are physical components. These two imaginary limitations then attempt to reference and build on each other to define the structure.
Furthermore, the apparatus of that of a wireless power system yet the claim limitations attempt to unusually define the structure of the wireless power system by its center of gravity. And not the center of gravity of the coils but rather the center of gravity of the imaginary and not real “centers”, making the limitations as a whole unintelligible.
To be clear, the only physical structure claimed in claim 1 is that of three coils and a housing. The claimed center of gravity is directed to the imaginary points of the first, second, and third centers which are not actual structure but arbitrary points and further disclosed as “near” which is a relative term.
The claim will be examined as best understood.
Regarding Claim 2
The claim as a whole is unintelligible in that it attempts to further limit non-structure of said imaginary reference point. The claim limitation “serving as a design guideline” is not germane to patentability of an apparatus claim nor is it clear what structure, if any, it is attempting to add to the apparatus claim.
Reagrding Claim 3
It is unclear what structure is intended to be added by the claim limitations directed to the imaginary limitations of said “centers”. The claim should positively recite said “arrangement” or consider a design patent.
wherein the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil are arranged such that a maximum of two coils overlap in a z-axis direction at any point on a xy-plane passing through the first center, the second center, and the third center.
Regarding Claims 6-9
The claims are inappropriately narrative attempting what the apparatus does via “controlled to perform a…” without any reference of what is being controlled nor what is doing the controlling resulting in purely narrative claim language. Because no structure is recited it is unclear what structure is intended. More particularly the following claim language is indefinite:
[Claim 6] The wireless power transmission pad as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil are controlled to perform a single-phase operation or a three-phase operation depending on phase differences of input power between the first through the third primary coils.
[Claim 7] The wireless power transmission pad as claimed in claim 6, wherein the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil are controlled to perform the single-phase operation when input power of a same phase is applied to each of the first through the third primary coils.
[Claim 8] The wireless power transmission pad as claimed in claim 6, wherein the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil are controlled to perform the three-phase operation input powers having a certain phase difference are applied to each of the first through the third primary coils.
[Claim 9] The wireless power transmission pad as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil are controlled to perform a single-phase operation or a three-phase operation based on an operation mode allowed in the secondary coil of the power reception pad.
Because of the great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of the claim(s), it is not proper to reject the present claim(s) on the basis of prior art. (See MPEP 2173.06 and In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962).
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. “Tripolar Pad for Inductive Power Transfer Systems”.
1. A wireless power transmission pad configured to transmit electric power wirelessly to a power reception pad that comprises a secondary coil, comprising:
a first primary coil (coil 1, FIG2);
a second primary (coil 2. FIG2);
a third primary coil (coil 3, FIG2); and
a housing configured to support the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil (housing read on said pad, FIG16 and as disclosed),
wherein the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil are disposed such that a center of gravity of the first, second, and third primary coils is concentrically located between said first, second, and third primary coils (see ie. Layout A, FIG5).
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) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. “Tripolar Pad for Inductive Power Transfer Systems” in view of 코빅 그랜트 안소니 KR 20150036460.
Kim fails to teach:
[Claim 4] The wireless power transmission pad as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil is formed with a flat wire wound by at least one turn.
[Claim 5] The wireless power transmission pad as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil is formed with a litz wire wound by at least one turn.
KR 20150036460 teaches:
[Claim 4] The wireless power transmission pad as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil is formed with a flat wire wound by at least one turn.
[Claim 5] The wireless power transmission pad as claimed in claim 1, wherein each of the first primary coil, the second primary coil, and the third primary coil is formed with a litz wire wound by at least one turn.
See specification, exert provided:
Although the coils 110 and 111 are each shown in a rectangular area in the figure for clarity, they actually include a substantially flat spiral winding of a Litz wire, which preferably occupies, for example, do. The windings, in fact, may not be exactly rectangular, for example, circular or elliptical, as suggested in the figure.
It would have been obvious to use said flat, litz style wire with the motivation of reducing AC losses at high frequencies, providing for ability of high-density coils which are easier to integrate into devices, and increased stability and winding efficiency.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. “Tripolar Pad for Inductive Power Transfer Systems” in view of Uczulko et al. US 2023/0059317.
Kim fails to teach:
[Claim 10] The wireless power transmission pad as claimed in claim 1, wherein, when the secondary coil of the power reception pad comprises a first secondary coil, a second secondary coil, and a third secondary coil, the first secondary coil, the second secondary coil, and the third secondary coil are disposed such that a center of gravity of
However Kim does teach said structure of concentrically located gravity of first, second and third coils (See FIG5, Layout A).
Uczulko teaches the use of identical primary and secondary sides (See Specification @ [0094]).
It would have been obvious to use the same structure for both of primary and secondary side with the motivation of inherent system symmetry, simplified design and manufacturing and easier control and tuning.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL CAVALLARI whose telephone number is (571)272-8541. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 0900-18:30.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (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 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.
/DANIEL CAVALLARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights