The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I, Fig.3, corresponding to claims 1-3 in the reply filed on 12/16/2025 is acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 4-8 have been herein withdrawn.
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 1-3 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.
Claim 1 recites a “power transmission device comprising: a power transmission coil that is disposed on a road based on a guide line, which is a line used when a travel route is set using an HD map in a travel routing section… a power transmission circuit that supplies power to the power transmission coil.” The scope of apparatus claim 1 is limited to the structural components of the power transmission device (i.e., a power transmission coil and a power transmission circuit), however, claim 1 appears to define the power transmission device’s power transmission coil by other features such as the “road” and the “guide line” that are not part of the power transmission device and are not further limiting. As such, the scope of claim 1 is ambiguous. It is further unclear what structural limitations “based on a guide line” is intended to add to the structure of the power transmission coil. Moreover, it is unclear the basis on which “based on a guide line” is intended to add to the structure of the power transmission coil. The phrase “based on a guide line” does not impose any definite structural limitation on the power transmission coil itself. For purposes of examination, the examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 1’s language of “based on a guide line, which is a line used when a travel route is set using an HD map in a travel route setting section…” as a whole is ambiguous and reads as a method/process whereas claim 1 is an apparatus. It is unclear what structural limitations “…which is a line used when a travel route is set using an HD map in a travel route setting section” is intended to add to the structure of the power transmission coil further noting that the aforementioned language is not part of the scope of the power transmission device and not further limiting to the structure of the power transmission coil itself. Additionally, “in a travel routing section” describes a functional process of a navigation system rather than a structural limitation of the power transmission coil. For purposes of examination, the examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 2 recites “…wherein the guide line is a lane link as static information contained in the HD map.” Claim 2 is indefinite because it is unclear what is intended by “lane link” and what structure the “lane link” is intended to add to the power transmission device. It is also unclear how a “guide line” defined as a “line” in claim 1 is “static information” in claim 2. Furthermore, as previously stated, the “guide line” and, in turn, the “lane link” are outside the scope of the claim’s “power transmission device” and thus do not further narrow the structure of the power transmission device. This makes the scope of claim 2 ambiguous and unclear. For purposes of examination, the examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 3 recites “a plurality of the power transmission coils are disposed along the road in the lane link.” It is unclear what is intended by the “lane link” and what structure the “lane link” is intended to add to the power transmission device. Furthermore, the lane link is not directed to the claimed subject matter of the power transmission device and is therefore outside the scope of the power transmission device. For purposes of examination, the examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoshizaki (2019/0084434 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
Yoshizaki (figs.1A, 2, 3, 8) teaches a power transmission device (for e.g., fig.3, par [9]) used in an in motion-power supply system (the recitation of “used in” is intended use. The claim is directed solely to the “power transmission device” and the “in-motion power supply system” is only recited in the preamble-thus, no patentable weight has been given to it) that supplies power to a vehicle (10) in motion in a wireless manner (see abstract, fig.1A), the power transmission device comprising: a power transmission coil (“ground coil” of 201) that is disposed on a road (see figs.1A, 8), and that supplies power to a power reception coil (101) of the vehicle in a wireless manner (abstract, par [40] and related discussion), and
a power transmission circuit (par [40] and related discussion; power source that supplies electric power to the ground coil and controller 202) that supplies power to the power transmission coil (par [40]; Yoshizaki teaches the controller 202 starts the turn of a power source that supplies electric power to the ground coil).
Regarding Claim 2,
Claim 2 recites “wherein the guide line is a lane link as static information contained in the HD map”. This language presents a great deal of confusion and uncertainty regarding the proper interpretation of “lane link as static information” and the specific structure intended to be added to the claimed subject matter of the power transmission device such that it would be improper to apply prior art. It is further not structurally limiting to the power transmission device.
Regarding Claim 3,
Yoshizaki teaches the power transmission device according to claim 2 and further teaches wherein a plurality of power transmission coils (see fig.1A, pars [36, 38]; plurality of ground coils) are disposed along the road (fig.1A, par [36]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASEM MOURAD whose telephone number is (571)270-7770. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6.
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.
/RASEM MOURAD/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/DANIEL CAVALLARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836