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 .
This is a Non-final Office Action on the merits. Claims 1-10 are currently pending and are addressed below.
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim of priority for foreign application KR10-2024-0046233, filed 04/04/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 10/23/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds 150 words. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Pg. 7, lines 15-16 recite “…may formed…”, which appears to be grammatically incorrect.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 4 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “…an air inlet that is formed in the front of the electric vehicle traveled by rotating a wheel by an electric motor to allow wind to flow in during traveling…”, in which the underlined portion appears to be grammatically incorrect due to the term “traveled”.
Claim 4 recites “…the the…”, which appears to be a typographical error.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee of KR 20050107864 A, filed 05/10/2004, hereinafter “Lee”, in view of Penev of US 20130306389 A1, filed 05/21/2012, hereinafter “Penev”.
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches:
An electric vehicle chargeable by wind energy, the electric vehicle comprising: (See at least pg. 3: “The present invention relates to a device for generating electric power for charging a vehicle battery, and more specifically, to a device for generating electric power using wind power and supplying it to a vehicle…”)
an air inlet that is formed in the front of the electric vehicle (See at least pg. 5: “The present invention relates to a wind power generator connected to a power connection portion that receives power for charging a vehicle battery, the wind power generator comprising: a casing having an intake port…” & pg. 15: “…Preferably, the casing (70) is installed inside the bonnet (84; see Fig. 5) at a location where it can best receive wind power, i.e., behind the radiator grille installed at the front of the vehicle (80)”)
a turbine that is formed at a rear end of the air inlet and rotated by wind power; (See at least pg. 16: “Figure 2 is a side cross-sectional view of a casing (70) surrounding a rotary wheel (20) of a wind power generator (10) according to the present invention. The casing (70) includes an intake port (71), an exhaust port (72), and an installation part (73). The wind coming in from the intake port (71) passes through the installation part (73) and is discharged through the discharge port (72), and the wind passing through the installation part (73) applies wind force to the rotary blade (21) of the rotary wheel (20), thereby rotating the rotary wheel (20)…”)
a power generation unit that includes a rotor coupled to a rotating shaft extended from the turbine and a stator disposed in a ring shape on the outside of the rotor and generates power by rotation of the rotor; (See at least pg. 12: “Although not shown, the wind power generator (10) according to the present invention may further include a gearbox on the rotation shaft (22') so as to appropriately control the rotational power of the rotary wheel (20') and transmit it to the generator (30'). The gearbox is composed of a plurality of gears that are linked to a rotating shaft (22'), so that the rotational force caused by wind power can be appropriately controlled, and as a result, the generation of electric power can be controlled. Referring again to FIG. 1, the generator (30) is composed of a rotor and a stator (not shown) and converts rotational power into electric power, and the voltage output from the generator (30) through this conversion is applied to the detection circuit (41) of the starter circuit (40)…”)
a power supply unit that converts power from the power generation unit into a chargeable voltage to charge a battery and supplies a driving voltage from the battery to the electric motor; and (See at least pg. 9: “…the wind power generator (10) of the present invention, which generates electric power for charging a battery (83) of an electric vehicle (80)…” & pg. 19: “…The rotor (20, 20') rotates due to wind power, and the rotational force is transmitted to the generator (30, 30') via the rotational shaft (22, 22'), and the rotational force is converted into electric force in the generator (30, 30'). In this way, the voltage generated from the generator (30, 30') is monitored by a detection circuit (41) connected to the output of the generator (30, 30')…”)
a controller that electrically connects the battery and the electric motor through an electrical system and controls charging from the power generation unit to the battery. (See at least pg. 19: “…a switching circuit (42) connected to the detection circuit (41) connects the detection circuit (41) and the constant voltage circuit (50) when the output voltage monitored by the detection circuit (41) is equal to or higher than a predetermined voltage, so that only a voltage equal to or higher than the predetermined voltage can be applied to the charging circuit (82) via the power connection portion (81).”)
Lee does not explicitly teach:
…traveled by rotating a wheel by an electric motor to allow wind to flow in during traveling…
Penev teaches:
…traveled by rotating a wheel by an electric motor to allow wind to flow in during traveling… (See at least [0100]: “Turning to FIG. 5, the wheel fan 28 is located centrally within the wheel. The induction means 20 of the stator and rotator is in each wheel. The wheel fan 28 sucks in air during tire rotation as indicated by the flow arrows. This suction forces the air through a mesh screen 36 to enter an air duct branch 34 through which the air is urged to reach the main duct 32 where the air combines with air sucked in through other wheels to turn blades of the turbine generator 26, which generates electricity…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Lee’s electric vehicle with Penev’s technique of rotating a wheel by an electric motor to allow wind to flow in during traveling. Doing so would be obvious for “boosting an amount of electrical energy available for a motor vehicle from recovered energy sources, including motor vehicle kinetic energy, wind flow, and solar radiation, and providing frictionless braking powered from the recovered energy sources” (See [0002] of Penev).
Regarding claim 8, Lee and Penev in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Penev additionally teaches:
wherein solar cell modules are arranged on an upper portion of a body of the electric vehicle. (See at least Fig. 4 & [0091]: “…FIG. 1 shows a roof mounted solar panel electricity generator 18…”)
Claims 2 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Penev and further in view of Zhao of CN 102267391 A, filed 06/01/2010, hereinafter “Zhao”, and Hua of CN 115447582 A, filed 10/11/2022, hereinafter “Hua”.
Regarding claim 2, Lee and Penev in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Penev additionally teaches:
wherein the air inlet includes an air inlet path formed to be recessed in a center or both sides of a front lower portion of the electric vehicle, and (See at least Fig. 4 & [0098]: “Air duct branches 34 from each of the wheels communicate with the main duct 32. Each of the wheel fans 28 have blades that rotate in unison with rotation of the vehicle wheel 10 to suck air through associated air duct branches 34 to reach the main duct 32…”)
Lee and Penev in combination do not explicitly teach:
further comprising a sensor unit including a wind speed sensor formed on the front of the electric vehicle to measure wind speed during traveling, and
an opening/closing port formed in the air inlet path and having an aperture structure to open/close the air inlet path, and
the controller operates the opening/closing port to open the air inlet path when a measurement value above a certain level is detected by the wind speed sensor.
Zhao teaches:
further comprising a sensor unit including a wind speed sensor formed on the front of the electric vehicle to measure wind speed during traveling, and (See at least [0022]: “This invention is equipped with an automatically opening and closing grille. It can use a wind speed sensor to sense the relative wind speed…”)
an opening/closing port formed in the air inlet path and having an aperture structure to open/close the air inlet path, and (See at least [0014]: “The wind turbine's air inlet is equipped with a grille. The grille blades are automatically controlled to open and close by a wind speed sensing control device. The air intake can be controlled by adjusting the opening angle of the grille blades or by adjusting the number of grille blades opening and closing, based on the relative wind speed during vehicle movement, thereby regulating the generator's operating power.”)
the controller operates the opening/closing port to open the air inlet path when a measurement value above a certain level is detected by the wind speed sensor. (See at least [0065]: “…When the vehicle speed is slow and the relative wind speed is low, the grille blades (10) are fully opened to allow sufficient airflow to pass through quickly and generate enough electrical energy. When the vehicle speed is relatively high and the relative wind speed is relatively high, the grille blades (10) can be closed or partially closed to limit the speed of airflow…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Lee and Penev’s electric vehicle with Zhao’s technique of including a wind speed sensor, an opening/closing port formed in the air inlet path having an aperture structure to open/close the air inlet path, and opening the air inlet path when a measurement value above a certain level is detected by the wind speed sensor. Doing so would be obvious for “accurately controlling the airflow through the air inlet of the vehicle-mounted wind turbine” (See [0022] of Zhao).
Lee, Penev, and Zhao in combination do not explicitly teach:
…a rain sensor to measure rainfall during a rainy season,
Hua teaches:
…a rain sensor to measure rainfall (See at least [0055]: “…the environmental sensing sensor 2 may include a rain sensor, a wind force and direction sensor, or a combination of a rain sensor and a wind force and direction sensor” & [0058]: “…wind speed and wind direction sensors can be combined to obtain wind speed and wind direction…”)
Although Hua does not explicitly teach measuring rainfall during a rainy season, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to measure rainfall during any time or any season with the benefit of “utiliz[ing] energy from the surrounding environment to provide power for the vehicle's battery, thereby reducing the vehicle's own energy consumption loss and improving the vehicle's energy economy” (See [0036] of Hua).
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Lee, Penev, and Zhao’s electric vehicle with Hua’s technique of including a wind sensor and a rain sensor. Doing so would be obvious to ““utilize energy from the surrounding environment to provide power for the vehicle's battery, thereby reducing the vehicle's own energy consumption loss and improving the vehicle's energy economy” (See [0036] of Hua).
Regarding claim 5, Lee, Penev, Zhao, and Hua in combination teach all the limitations of claim 2 as discussed above.
Lee additionally teaches:
wherein the air inlet path is formed with a tapered cross-sectional structure whose diameter narrows toward the turbine. (See at least Figs. 2-3, pg. 6: “…by making the cross-sectional area through which the wind passes from the intake wider than the installation portion where the rotary wheel is installed, the wind speed in the rotary wheel is made faster…” & pg. 19: “…the wind passing through the intake port (71, 71') has its wind speed increased by the funnel-shaped structure of the casing (70, 70') and acts on the rotary blades (21, 21') of the rotary vane (20, 20')…”)
Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Penev, Zhao, and Hua, and further in view of Heo of KR20100011392A, filed 07/25/2008, hereinafter “Heo”.
Regarding claim 3, Lee, Penev, Zhao, and Hua in combination teach all the limitations of claim 2 as discussed above.
Lee additionally teaches:
further comprising a filter net formed at the front end of the air inlet path to block the inflow of external foreign substances and (See at least pg. 19: “…. Although not shown, it is desirable to install a protective net in the intake (71') to protect the rotating blade (21') of the rotary wheel (20') from foreign substances…”)
Lee, Penev, Zhao, and Hua in combination do not explicitly teach:
a blocking film formed at the front of the filter net to open and close,
wherein the controller opens the blocking film when the electric vehicle travels at a certain speed or higher.
However, Heo teaches a wind generator in a vehicle that includes a grill at the entrance of a wind duct and a window that opens to allow wind flow when the vehicle speed “is higher than the vehicle speed required for wind power generation” (See at least pgs. 6-8). Therefore, one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it an obvious design choice to apply the teachings of Heo using any kind of protective component or device, such as a “blocking film”, with the benefit of being able to allow or “prevent wind from being supplied to the wind generator” and “prevent foreign substances from entering” (See pg. 14 of Heo).
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Lee, Penev, Zhao, and Hua’s electric vehicle with Heo’s technique of including a window that opens when the electric vehicle travels at a certain speed or higher. Doing so would be obvious to allow or “prevent wind from being supplied to the wind generator” and “prevent foreign substances from entering” (See pg. 14 of Heo).
Claims 4 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Penev and further in view of Smith of US 8436485 B1, filed 02/22/2010, hereinafter “Smith”.
Regarding claim 4, Lee and Penev in combination teach all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above.
Lee additionally teaches:
wherein the turbine includes a blade coupled to the rotation shaft, (See at least pg. 10: “…The rotary wheel (20) has a plurality of rotary blades (21; see FIG. 2)…”)
an encoder measuring a rotation number of the rotation shaft, and (See at least pg. 20: “…the rotational speed detected by the detection sensor is monitored by a detection circuit (41)…”)
the controller controls whether to charge the battery from the power generation unit according to the the rotation number by the encoder. (See at least pg. 21: “…when the rotational speed is a predetermined number or more, a switching circuit (42) connects the detection circuit (41) and the constant voltage circuit (50), so that only a voltage higher than a predetermined voltage related to a rotational speed higher than a predetermined number can be applied to the charging circuit (82) via the power connection unit (81)…”)
Lee and Penev in combination do not explicitly teach:
a bearing guiding the rotation of the rotation shaft, and
Smith teaches:
a bearing guiding the rotation of the rotation shaft, and (See at least Fig. 5 & col. 8, lines 37-40: “…At least one free wheeling fan 18 having blades 20 of any shape or size is rotatively mounted by shaft 24 of any shape or size through the pivotal frame portion via bearing 74 to at least one electric motor or generator 26…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Lee and Penev’s electric vehicle with Smith’s technique of including a bearing guiding the rotation of the rotation shaft. Doing so would be obvious “for supporting said shaft between said fan and said electric generator” (See claim 1 of Smith).
Regarding claim 9, Lee, Penev, and Smith in combination teach all the limitations of claim 4 as discussed above.
Lee additionally teaches:
wherein the blade is formed in two stages to be respectively disposed at front and rear ends of the rotating shaft. (See at least Fig. 3 & pg. 17 : “…a rotary shaft (22) extending from both sides of a generator (30) is arranged at both ends of the rotary shaft (22). The generator (30) is installed approximately in the center of the installation part (73), and may be installed inside the casing (70) with a partition formed from the rotating wheel (20) by a casing material, or the part where the generator (30) is installed may be configured to be outside the casing (70). Preferably, the casing (70) has a shape in which the cross-sectional area through which the wind passes gradually decreases from the suction port (71) toward the rotary vane (20) on both sides, as shown, i.e., a shape in which two funnels are attached, so that as the wind coming in from the suction port (71) flows along the inclined surface of the casing (70)…”)
Claim 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Penev, Zhao, and Hua, and further in view of Ko of KR 20200015341 A, filed 11/02/2018, hereinafter “Ko”.
Regarding claim 6, Lee, Penev, Zhao, and Hua in combination teach all the limitations of claim 5 as discussed above.
Lee additionally teaches:
wherein an exhaust port communicating with the air inlet path is formed at the rear of the electric vehicle, and (See at least Fig. 3 & pgs. 16-17: “…The casing (70) includes…an exhaust port (72)… The wind coming in from the intake port (71) passes through the installation part (73) and is discharged through the discharge port (72)…the casing (70) has a shape in which the cross-sectional area through which the wind passes gradually decreases from the suction port (71) toward the rotary vane (20) on both sides, as shown, i.e., a shape in which two funnels are attached, so that as the wind coming in from the suction port (71) flows along the inclined surface of the casing (70), the wind speed increases through the narrowed cross-sectional area, and the increased wind power is transmitted to the rotary vane (21) of the rotary vane (20)…”)
Lee, Penev, Zhao, and Hua in combination do not explicitly teach:
a size of the exhaust port is formed to be relatively larger than a size of the air inlet path.
Ko teaches:
a size of the exhaust port is formed to be relatively larger than a size of the air inlet path. (See at least Fig. 2, [0029]: “…These inlets (10) are formed in a shape in which the cross-sectional area gradually decreases as they go backward…” & [0031]: “…The exhaust port (30) is formed in a shape in which the cross-sectional area gradually increases toward the rear…”)
One having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to combine Lee, Penev, Zhao, and Hua’s electric vehicle with Ko’s exhaust port being larger than the size of the air inlet path. Doing so would be obvious so that “the flow rate of air passing through the exhaust port (30) decreases.” (See [0031] of Ko).
Regarding claim 7, Lee, Penev, Zhao, Hua, and Ko in combination teach all the limitations of claim 6 as discussed above.
Ko additionally teaches:
wherein the exhaust port is formed to extend to be inclined at a certain angle upward from the ground. (See at least [0034]: “The exhaust section (32) is formed continuously at the rear of the expansion section (31) as shown in Fig. 5, and is formed in a shape that is bent 45 degrees downward from the expansion section (31). Accordingly, the air passing through the expansion section (31) and the exhaust section (32) is discharged in a curved flow form toward the ground.”)
Claim 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Penev and Smith and further in view of Hassan of US 20110100731 A1, filed 10/30/2009, hereinafter “Hassan”.
Regarding claim 10, Lee, Penev, and Smith in combination teach all the limitations of claim 4 as discussed above.
Lee, Penev, and Smith in combination do not explicitly teach:
wherein a nacelle is formed to protrude at a front center of the blade.
Hassan teaches:
wherein a nacelle is formed to protrude at a front center of the blade. (See at least Fig. 4 & [0026]: “The wind streams surrounding the vehicle at the front of the vehicle, the top of the vehicle, the left side and the right side of the vehicle are harnessed by air inlets and passed through by a funnel-like air ducts into one or more wind turbines...Each wind turbine system comprises…(3) nacelle casing that holds (a) a gearbox to increase speed of shaft between rotor hub and electric generator…”)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
KR 20230128991 A is directed to a wind power generating system for an electric vehicle that can control a degree of air inflow.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nikki Molina whose telephone number is (571) 272-5180. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays, 7:30-4:30 PT. 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, Aniss Chad, can be reached on (571) 270-3832. 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.
/NIKKI MARIE M MOLINA/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/ANISS CHAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662