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 § 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, 4-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kimoto et al (US 20200398682).
Re Claim 1; Kimoto discloses a vehicle, the vehicle comprising: a battery configured to store electric power; (Kimoto discloses an "electric vehicle 4" with a "battery 44" for storing power (0014, 0028))
a power receiving apparatus (4) provided with a power receiving coil (52) for receiving electric power from a power transmitting coil (24) provided at a road (2); (Kimoto describes the "electric vehicle 4" having a "power reception apparatus 50" with a "power reception coil 52" for receiving power from "power transmission coil 24" of power supply apparatuses 20 embedded in the "traveling road 2" (0014, 0016, 0025).)
a motor configured to output drive power of the vehicle; (Kimoto discloses a "motor 42" which is a "power source for the electric vehicle 4" (0028).)
an electric power supply circuit (54) configured to supply electric power from at least one of the battery and the power receiving apparatus to the motor;
(Kimoto states the "battery 44... supplies power to the motor 42" and the "charger 54" (part of the power reception apparatus) converts received power to DC power and "charges the battery 44" (0028, 0025).and
a control device (56) configured to control the supply of electric power to the motor, wherein the control device is further configured to select a source of supply of electric power to the motor from the battery and the power receiving apparatus in accordance with whether the vehicle is running in a power supply area at which the power transmitting coil is provided.
(Kimoto describes a "charging controller 56" and "vehicle controller 46" that manage power flow and vehicle operation (0028, 0031). The system uses "sensor 28" and "transmitter 58" to detect the vehicle's presence in a power supply area, triggering power supply to the "power reception coil 52" and subsequently charging the "battery 44" (0019, 0025, 0032, 34). The decision to draw from the battery or utilize received power for the motor, especially when power is being supplied from the road, is a fundamental aspect of the disclosed on-travel power supply system.)
Re Claim 2; Kimoto discloses wherein the control device is further configured to select only the power receiving apparatus as the source of supply of electric power when the vehicle is running in the power supply area.
(Kimoto describes charging the battery using the "charger 54" from power received via the "power reception coil 52" when in a power supply area (0025). If the received power is sufficient to meet the motor's demands and potentially charge the battery simultaneously, then functionally the received power can be considered the sole new source of energy for the motor, even if routed through the battery.)
Re Claim 4; Kimoto discloses wherein the control device is further configured to select only the battery as the source of supply of electric power even when the vehicle is running in the power supply area, when trouble arises in supply of power to the vehicle. (Kimoto explicitly addresses "failed road segments" where power supply is disabled. In such scenarios, the system is designed to "secure the calculated required energy amount" in the battery "before the electric vehicle reaches the failed road segment," clearly indicating reliance on the battery during such trouble (0005, 0035-0037).)
Re Claim 5; Kimoto discloses wherein the control device is further configured to supply electric power from the power receiving apparatus to the motor and the battery when selecting only the power receiving apparatus as the source of supply of electric power and the amount of power supplied to the vehicle is greater than the electric power consumed by the motor.
(Kimoto states that the "charger 54" converts received power and "charges the battery 44" (0025). The motor requires power for vehicle propulsion (0028). If the power received exceeds the motor's immediate consumption, the surplus would naturally be used to charge the battery, a fundamental aspect of an on-travel charging system for an electric vehicle.)
Re Claim 6; Kimoto discloses Method of supply of electric power to a motor for outputting drive power of a vehicle
the vehicle comprising: a battery for storing electric power;": This element is mapped to the electric vehicle (4) comprising a battery (44) (paragraph 0028).
a power receiving apparatus having a power receiving coil for receiving electric power from a power transmitting coil provided at a road;
(This maps to the electric vehicle (4) being provided with a power reception apparatus (50) that includes a power reception coil (52) for receiving power from power transmission coils (24) of power supply apparatuses (20) embedded in the road (2) (paragraph 0025).)
and an electric power supply circuit configured so as to supply electric power from at least one of the battery and the power receiving apparatus to the motor, (This maps to the battery (44) supplying power to the motor (42) and other in-vehicle apparatuses, and the charger (54) within the power reception apparatus (50) charging the battery (44) (paragraph 0028). The system's overall configuration implies a circuit for power distribution.)
the electric power supply method comprising selecting a source of supply of electric power to the motor from the battery and the power receiving apparatus in accordance with whether the vehicle is running in a power supply area at which the power transmitting coil is provided. (This maps to the core function of the on-travel power supply system where power is supplied from power supply apparatuses (20) (i.e., in a power supply area) to the electric vehicle (4) while traveling, and the vehicle manages its power based on this availability, especially in scenarios like failed road segments where the power reception apparatus cannot supply power, thus relying on the battery (paragraph 0002) (0014, 0019, 0025, 0032))
Re Claim 7; Kimoto discloses an electric power supply apparatus mounted in a vehicle
the vehicle comprises: a battery for storing electric power; (Mapped to the electric vehicle (4) comprising a battery (44) (paragraph 0028).)
a power receiving apparatus having a power receiving coil for receiving electric power from a power transmitting coil provided at a road; (Mapped to the power reception apparatus (50) with power reception coil (52) receiving power from road-provided power transmission coils (24) (paragraph 0025).)
a motor for outputting drive power of the vehicle; (Mapped to the motor (42) serving as a power source for the electric vehicle (4) (paragraph 0028).)
and an electric power supply circuit configured so as to supply electric power from at least one of the battery and the power receiving apparatus to the motor, and (Mapped to the battery (44) supplying power to the motor (42) and the power reception apparatus (50) charging the battery (44) (paragraph 0028). The overall system description inherently includes power supply circuitry.)
the electric power supply apparatus is configured to select a source of supply of electric power to the motor from the battery and the power receiving apparatus in accordance with whether the vehicle is running in a power supply area at which the power transmitting coil is provided.
(Mapped to the system's operational logic, where the charging controller (56) and vehicle controller (46) manage power usage and charging based on external power availability (being in a power supply area) (paragraph 0025). The system's response to failed road segments illustrates this selection logic (e.g., securing energy in advance when in a non-power-supply segment) (paragraph 0005) (0025, 0028, 0031))
Re Claim 8; Kimoto discloses further configured to select only the power receiving apparatus as the source of supply of electric power when the vehicle is running in the power supply area.
select only the power receiving apparatus as the source of supply of electric power when the vehicle is running in the power supply area.": This is implicitly supported by the system's intent to supply power from power supply apparatuses (20) to the electric vehicle (4) while traveling (paragraph 0002), and the charging controller (56) controlling charging by the charger (54) which receives power via the power reception apparatus (50) (paragraph 0025 (0019, 0025, 0032)).
Re Claim 9; Kimoto discloses further configured to select only the power receiving apparatus as the source of supply of electric power when the vehicle is running in the power supply area and a consumed electric power of the motor is less than or equal to a predetermined value and to select the battery and the power receiving apparatus as the source of supply of electric power when the consumed electric power is greater than the predetermined value.
select only the power receiving apparatus as the source... when... consumed electric power... is less than or equal to a predetermined value": This represents a power management strategy within the electric vehicle (4), managed by components like the charging controller (56) and vehicle controller (46), though this specific logic is not explicitly detailed in the provided abstract or description, it aligns with the overall goal of efficiently utilizing supplied power.
select the battery and the power receiving apparatus as the source... when... consumed electric power is greater than the predetermined value.": Similar to the above, this represents a power management strategy. The description mentions the battery (44) supplying power to the motor (42) and other devices, implying it can supplement external power (paragraph 0028).
Re Claim 10; Kimoto discloses wherein the vehicle selects only the battery as the source of supply of electric power even when the vehicle is running in the power supply area, when trouble arises in supply of power to the vehicle.
the vehicle selects only the battery as the source of supply of electric power... when trouble arises in supply of power to the vehicle.": This is directly supported by the system's handling of failed road segments. When power supply apparatuses fail, creating a failed road segment where power cannot be supplied, the electric vehicle (4) is configured to secure the required energy amount by charging its battery (44) in advance to pass through the failed segment without power supply, effectively relying solely on the battery during that segment (paragraph 0005, 35). This implies the selection of the battery as the power source when external power supply fails.
Re Claim 11; Kimoto discloses further configured to supply electric power from the power receiving apparatus to the motor and the battery when selecting only the power receiving apparatus as the source of supply of electric power and the amount of power supplied to the vehicle is greater than the electric power consumed by the motor.
supply electric power from the power receiving apparatus to the motor and the battery when... amount of power supplied... is greater than the electric power consumed by the motor.
(This maps to the charger (54) converting AC power from the power reception coil (52) into DC power and charging the battery (44) (paragraph 0025, 28). When power is available from the power supply apparatuses (20), the system aims to charge the battery (44) up to a predetermined amount while traveling (paragraph 0033). This implies that if the received power exceeds what the motor (42) immediately consumes, the excess can be used to charge the battery (44).)
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) 3, 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimoto
Re Claim 3: Kimoto system involves a battery, a motor, and an on-road charging system, with controllers managing charging and vehicle operation (0028, 0031).
Kimoto does not disclose wherein the control device is further configured to select only the power receiving apparatus as the source of supply of electric power when the vehicle is running in the power supply area and a consumed electric power of the motor is less than or equal to a predetermined value and to select the battery and the power receiving apparatus as the source of supply of electric power when the consumed electric power is greater than the predetermined value.
However, It would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement logic within the control device (e.g., charging controller 56, vehicle controller 46) to prioritize or combine power sources based on the motor's power demand, especially when exceeding the power available directly from the power reception apparatus or to maintain battery charge levels (0033-0034). This is a standard power management strategy for electric or hybrid vehicles.
Re Claim 12:
Kimoto discloses an electric vehicle comprising a power receiving coil (24), a charger (25), a battery (44), and an electric motor (42). The charger converts received AC power to DC and charges the battery, which then supplies power to the motor. Kimoto also teaches that the vehicle receives power from a road-embedded power supply apparatus via non-contact transmission (paragraph [0031]).
Kimoto teaches a power supply circuit that includes a charger and battery, which together form a path for supplying power to the motor. While Kimoto does not explicitly name “switching elements,” the functional equivalent is present: the system includes control logic that determines whether power is drawn from the battery or directly from the power reception coil.
The control device (implicit in Kimoto’s vehicle control system) governs the flow of power, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement this control via switching elements to manage power routing between multiple sources. Furthermore
It would have been obvious to incorporate switching elements to allow dynamic selection between battery and direct power reception, as this is a well-known technique in hybrid power systems to optimize energy efficiency and operational flexibility. The use of switching elements to control power paths is a routine design choice in electric vehicle architecture.
Re Claim 13; wherein the electric power supply circuit has a plurality of switching elements for switching a path of supply of electric power to the motor, and the method comprises selecting the source of supply of electric power to the motor from the battery and the power receiving apparatus by controlling on/off states of the plurality of switching elements.
Teachings of Kimoto:
Kimoto describes a method of supplying power to an electric vehicle via a road-embedded power supply system. The vehicle receives power through a coil, converts it, and either stores it in a battery or uses it to drive the motor. The method inherently involves selection between power sources.
Kimoto’s method includes supplying power to the motor from either the battery or the power receiving coil. The selection between sources is managed by the vehicle’s control system.
• Implementing this selection via switching elements is a known engineering solution and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
The use of switching elements to control power source selection is a standard practice in power electronics. It allows for seamless transition between energy sources and is commonly used in dual-source systems. Applying this to Kimoto’s method is a straightforward optimization.
Re Claim 14;
The electric power supply apparatus of claim 4, wherein the electric power supply circuit has a plurality of switching elements for switching a path of supply of electric power to the motor, and the electric power supply apparatus is configured to select the source of supply of electric power to the motor from the battery and the power receiving apparatus by controlling on/off states of the plurality of switching elements.
Kimoto discloses a power supply apparatus comprising a power transmission coil, a power reception coil, a charger, and a battery. The system supplies power to the motor either directly or via stored energy.
Kimoto’s power supply apparatus includes the necessary components to route power to the motor from two sources. The apparatus is configured to manage power flow based on operational conditions. The addition of switching elements to explicitly control the path of power is a routine enhancement that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Switching elements are commonly used in power supply circuits to manage multiple input sources. Their inclusion in Kimoto’s apparatus would improve control and reliability, making it an obvious improvement.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Argument 1:
Kimoto fails to disclose each and every feature of independent claim 1, particularly the features regarding specified apparatuses to conduct power to a vehicle or from the vehicle, and the power supply apparatus that is independent of the vehicle.
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner acknowledges the applicant’s position; however, the argument is not persuasive. Kimoto discloses a power supply facility 10 that is structurally separate from the vehicle and provides power to the vehicle via non‑contact transmission. This facility is not mounted on the vehicle and is not part of the vehicle’s internal systems. The applicant asserts that the claimed “power supply apparatus” must be independent of both the vehicle and the road, but the claims do not explicitly require that the apparatus be non‑road‑mounted or non‑embedded.
Kimoto’s power supply facility is an external apparatus that supplies power to the vehicle while the vehicle is traveling. This satisfies the broad claim language requiring an apparatus that conducts power to the vehicle. The applicant’s argument relies on a narrower interpretation than what is supported by the claim language. Without explicit structural limitations in the claim, the examiner must apply the broadest reasonable interpretation, under which Kimoto reads on the claimed features.
Applicant’s Argument 2:
Kimoto fails to disclose a power supply apparatus that is not mounted on the vehicle and is not embedded in the road.
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner notes the applicant’s attempt to distinguish based on physical placement of the apparatus. However, the claims do not recite any requirement that the power supply apparatus must be portable, free‑standing, non‑fixed, or non‑embedded. The claims simply require an apparatus that supplies power to the vehicle.
Kimoto’s power supply facility 10 is an apparatus that supplies power to the vehicle. The fact that it is located on or in the road does not remove it from the scope of the claim as written. The applicant’s argument attempts to import limitations from the specification into the claims, which is not permitted.
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, Kimoto’s Road‑side power supply facility satisfies the claimed “power supply apparatus.”
Applicant’s Argument 3:
Kimoto fails to disclose bypassing the vehicle battery or operating the vehicle without charging the vehicle battery.
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner does not find this argument persuasive. Kimoto discloses that the power receiving coil 21 receives power from the road‑side supply, and the power conversion circuit 22 converts that power and supplies it to the power supply coil 23, which in turn supplies power directly to the control device 2 of the vehicle.
Kimoto further states that the power storage device 24 is optional. When the storage device is not present, the system necessarily supplies power directly to the control device without charging a battery. This is functionally equivalent to “bypassing the battery.”
The applicant’s argument assumes that Kimoto requires battery charging in all embodiments, but the disclosure explicitly allows operation without storage. Therefore, the examiner maintains that Kimoto teaches or at least suggests supplying power directly to the vehicle without requiring battery charging.
Applicant’s Argument 4:
Kimoto fails to disclose the claimed ability to select between the battery and the power receiving apparatus.
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner acknowledges the applicant’s position but finds the argument unconvincing. Kimoto discloses a system in which power may be supplied either from the battery or directly from the power receiving coil. The system includes a charger, a battery, and a direct supply path to the control device.
The claim limitation requires that the power to the motor is selected from both the battery and the receiver. Kimoto discloses that the motor is powered by the battery, and when the vehicle charges via the transmitter while the motor runs, both the battery and the receiver supply power to the motor. Thus, implicitly teaching the selection as claimed.
Thus, even if Kimoto does not explicitly describe “switching elements,” the selection between power sources is inherently present, and the use of switching elements to implement such selection would have been obvious.
Applicant’s Argument 5:
Independent claims 1, 6, and 7 are allowable because Kimoto fails to disclose each and every feature, and the new dependent claims 12–14 are allowable by virtue of depending on allowable base claims.
Examiner’s Response:
The examiner cannot agree. As explained above, Kimoto teaches or suggests the features the applicant asserts are missing. The applicant’s distinctions rely on interpretations narrower than the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims.
Because the independent claims are not allowable, the dependent claims cannot be allowable solely by dependency. Furthermore, the additional features recited in claims 12–14 switching elements and selection between power sources are well‑known and would have been obvious to incorporate into Kimoto’s system.
Therefore, the examiner maintains the rejections of the independent claims and the dependent claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL KESSIE whose telephone number is (571)272-4449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pmEst.
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 KESSIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836