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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-8, filed 7/06/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly found prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of (CN215679545) (as filed by Applicant) in view of BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1).
Re claim 1. CN215679545 discloses (abstract) a transmitter (page 3 part of mobile terminal) for a call bell system (FIG.1) comprising:
a call switch arranged to send a call signal to a receiver when a user (i.e. a mobile terminal for patients) requires assistance (page 2 describes a mobile terminal with three keys which serve as switches to control transmitting a signal to a receiving host which can then activate warning bells).
an energy harvesting module (page 3 i.e. external plug-in charging interfaces to be connected to corresponding charging equipment – interfaces are well known to harvest energy for future use) arranged to be powered by a user’s manipulation to ensure the operation of the transmitter remains uninterrupted (page 4 i.e. batteries are charged so as to prevent failure during power failure to ensure life safety).
However, CN215679545 fails to explicitly disclose:
energy harvesting module arranged to be powered by a user's manipulation to ensure the operation of the transmitter remains uninterrupted, wherein the user's manipulation comprises shaking or moving the transmitter to generate kinetic energy for the energy harvesting module.
BAILEY teaches (abstract) in a similar field of invention, wherein a battery charger of an electronic device harvests energy by shaking or moving of electronic device to generate kinetic energy, such that a user’s manipulation in the form of turns motion of the user's arm, into electrical energy [0012]. Other examples are specified by BAILEY to help generate energy. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try harvesting energy for a battery using kinetic energy generated by a user in order to help recharge a battery.
Re claim 9. CN215679545 discloses (as for claim 1) a call bell system comprising:
a receiver (page 4 i.e. receiving host includes a receiver and transmitter for communication functions) arranged to alert a caregiver when it receives a call signal from one or more transmitters, and
one or more transmitters (page 3 describes the mobile terminal), each of the transmitters comprises a call switch arranged to send a call signal to the receiver when a user requires assistance, and an energy harvesting module arranged to be powered by a user’s manipulation to ensure the operation of the transmitter remains uninterrupted, wherein the user's manipulation comprises shaking or moving the transmitter to generate kinetic energy for the energy harvesting module.
Claim(s) 2, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN215679545) in view of BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) further in view of JAY et al. (US 20130102248 A1).
Re claim 2 and 10. However, CN215679545 and BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) fails to explicitly disclose:
wherein the energy harvesting module comprises an energy storage unit for energizing the transmitter, and an energy harvesting block for charging the energy storage unit by harvesting ambient energy.
JAY teaches [0092] energy storage unit (power storage device 1106 is a rechargeable battery) an energy harvester block 1130 for charging energy storage unit (FIG.11) wherein ambient energy is harvested.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had good reason to pursue the known options of harvesting ambient energy. It would require no more than "ordinary skill and common sense," to try charging the batteries using ambient energy.
Claim(s) 3-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN215679545) in view of BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) further in view of JAY et al. (US 20130102248 A1) further in view of WU et al. (US 10637257 B2).
Re claim 3. CN215679545 discloses (page 4 - small battery and power supply battery… can ensure to charge when having the commercial power, when having a power failure…has sufficient electric quantity supply equipment to operate…) as modified by BAILEY and JAY, wherein the energy storage unit comprises a main energy storage element, and a backup energy storage element for charging the transmitter when the main energy storage element fails to provide electrical power.
Implicitly, a smaller battery would be used as a backup energy storage while a power supply battery could be used as the main energy storage.
WU suggests in a similar field of invention, (claim 1) using a main energy battery and a backup energy battery.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had good reason to pursue the known options of using a main battery and a backup battery. It would require no more than "ordinary skill and common sense," to try using the energy storage elements as taught by WU for main and backup power in case of any failure.
Re claim 4. However, CN215679545, BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) and JAY fails to explicitly disclose:
wherein the main energy storage element has a higher capacity than the backup energy storage element.
WU teaches (claim 1) the main battery has higher capacity than the secondary battery.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try using batteries matching these properties in order to provide a secondary means for powering.
Re claim 5. However, CN215679545, BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) and JAY fails to explicitly disclose:
wherein the backup energy storage element has a higher charging priority than the main energy storage element.
WU suggests using different types of batteries.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had good reason to pursue the known options of using a main battery and a backup battery with different charging priorities. It would require no more than "ordinary skill and common sense," to try charging the backup battery first since main battery would have more charge given its larger capacity.
Re claim 6. However, CN215679545 and BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) fails to explicitly disclose:
the transmitter in accordance with claim 2, wherein the energy harvesting block is configured to harvest electromagnetic wave energy for charging the energy storage unit.
JAY teaches [0092] ambient energy including radio waves.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had good reason to pursue the known options of trying ambient energy such as radio waves. It would require no more than "ordinary skill and common sense," to try charging the batteries using ambient energy.
Re claim 7. However, CN215679545 and BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) fails to explicitly disclose:
the call bell system in accordance with claim 2, wherein the energy harvesting block is configured to harvest kinetic energy for charging the energy storage unit.
JAY teaches [0092] ambient energy including thermal.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had good reason to pursue the known options of trying ambient energy such as thermal sources. It would require no more than "ordinary skill and common sense," to try charging the batteries using ambient energy.
Re claim 8. However, CN215679545 BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) fails to explicitly disclose:
the call bell system in accordance with claim 2, wherein the energy harvesting block is configured to harvest solar energy for charging the energy storage unit.
JAY teaches [0092] ambient energy including solar.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had good reason to pursue the known options of trying ambient energy such as solar. It would require no more than "ordinary skill and common sense," to try charging the batteries using ambient energy.
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN215679545) in view of BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) further in view of WU et al. (US 10637257 B2).
Re claim 11. CN215679545 discloses (page 4 - small battery and power supply battery… can ensure to charge when having the commercial power, when having a power failure…has sufficient electric quantity supply equipment to operate…) wherein the energy storage unit comprises a main energy storage element, and a backup energy storage element for charging the transmitter when the main energy storage element fails to provide electrical power.
Implicitly, a smaller battery would be used as a backup energy storage while a power supply battery could be used as the main energy storage.
WU suggests in a similar field of invention, (claim 1) using a main energy battery and a backup energy battery.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had good reason to pursue the known options of using a main battery and a backup battery. It would require no more than "ordinary skill and common sense," to try using the energy storage elements as taught by WU for main and backup power in case of any failure.
Re claim 12. However, CN215679545 and BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) fails to explicitly disclose:
The call bell system in accordance with claim 11, wherein the main energy storage element has a higher capacity than the backup energy storage element.
WU teaches (claim 1) the main battery has higher capacity than the secondary battery.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try using batteries matching these properties in order to provide a secondary means for powering.
Re claim 13. However, CN215679545 and BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) fails to explicitly disclose:
The call bell system in accordance with claim 11, wherein the backup energy storage element has a higher charging priority than the main energy storage element.
WU suggests using different types of batteries.
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have had good reason to pursue the known options of using a main battery and a backup battery with different charging priorities. It would require no more than "ordinary skill and common sense," to try charging the backup battery first since main battery would have more charge given its larger capacity.
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN215679545) in view of BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) further in view of WU et al. (US 10637257 B2) further in view of JAY et al. (US 20130102248 A1).
Claim 14 rejected as for claim 6.
Claim 15 rejected as for claim 7.
Claim 16 rejected as for claim 8.
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN215679545) in view of BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) further in view of JAY et al. (US 20130102248 A1) and further in view of SOBUE (US 5734204 A).
However, (CN215679545) in view of BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) and JAY et al. (US 20130102248 A1) fails to explicitly disclose:
Re claim 17. the transmitter in accordance with claim 2, wherein the energy storage unit comprises a main energy storage element and a backup energy storage element, and wherein the energy harvesting module is configured to switch to the backup energy storage element when a shortage of power supply from the main energy storage element is detected.
Re claim 18. the transmitter in accordance with claim 17, wherein the energy harvesting module is configured to charge the backup energy storage element before charging the main energy storage element.
SOBUE teaches (abstract) in a similar field of invention, (Background/Summary) using a main power supply and backup power supply combined to provide extra support for energy.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try using a main power supply and a backup power supply as suggested in order to obtain a means to support energy needs once a main power supply is not operational.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (CN215679545) in view of BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) further in view of JAY et al. (US 20130102248 A1) and further in view of MCCROSKY (US 20100240404 A1).
Re claim 19. However, (CN215679545) and BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) and JAY et al. (US 20130102248 A1) fails to explicitly disclose:
the transmitter in accordance with claim 2, wherein the energy harvesting block comprises a kinetic energy harvester, a converter connected to the kinetic energy harvester, and a power management unit connected to the converter and configured to charge the energy storage unit.
MCCROSKY teaches (abstract) in a similar field of invention, [0032, 0038] including a kinetic energy harvester, converter and power management configured to recharge a battery.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try all the elements as taught by MCCROSKY in order to properly harvest energy from kinetic energy.
Re claim 20. (CN215679545) in view of BAILEY et al. (US 20060139000 A1) and JAY et al. (US 20130102248 A1) discloses the transmitter in accordance with claim 19, wherein the kinetic energy harvester is configured to capture kinetic energy generated by human motion or vibrations (BAILEY clearly requires capturing kinetic energy generated by human motion).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CARLOS E GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-1354. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-6pm F 9-5pm.
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, Brian Zimmerman can be reached at (571) 272-3059. 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.
CARLOS E. GARCIA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2686
/Carlos Garcia/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2686 7/15/2026
Prosecution Insights