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 Group I, claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 2/3/2026 is acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 8-10 have been herein withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “… a control unit configured to be allowed to acquire information about a terminal voltage …” lines 9-10. The recitation of “…configured to be allowed” does not positively recite the limitations that follow and does not actually require the information about a terminal voltage to be acquired. Applicant is encouraged to amend the claims to positively recite the limitations. Appropriate correction is required
Claim 1 recites “…and acquire characteristic information of a system that charges the second power supply unit” in lines 16-17 of the claim. The claim does not define “a system” and further does not recite any relationship between the “system” and the rest of the components of the power transmission device or power reception device. The applicant is encouraged to further amend the claim to provide a basic relation between the “system” and the rest of the components introduced in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 recites “…in a case where the predetermined power is transmitted…” in lines 18-19. The recitation of “in a case where” is a hypothetical scenario that indicates that the case is not required to happen and therefore is not a positive recitation. The applicant is encouraged to amend the claim with language that positively recites the limitations. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a power Transmission unit configured to transmit power…” in claim 1.
“a power conversion unit configured to generate supply power…” in claim 1.
“a control unit configured to be allowed to acquire information about a terminal voltage of a second power supply unit…” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakanishi et al. (2021/0399583 A1) in view of Draak et al. (2022/0337093 A1) or Kim et al. (2012/0286726 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
Nakanishi (figs.1, 3) teaches a power transmission device comprising:
a power transmission unit (item 3 and resonance capacitors shown in figs.2-3, pars [41-42]) configured to transmit power to a power reception device (reception device shown on the “receiving side” in figs.1, 3, pars [40, 42] and related discussion) by contactless power transmission (pars [40, 42]);
a power conversion unit (item 2) configured to generate supply power to be supplied to the power transmission unit using power of a first power supply unit (battery 101, pars [42, 47-48]; conversion unit 2 generates supply power to be supplied to the power transmission unit using DC power of 101), and supply the supply power to the power transmission unit (pars [42, 47-48]); and
a control unit (14, par [43]) configured to be allowed to acquire information about a terminal voltage (fig.3, par [50]; load voltage information Vx about load voltage V/terminal voltage) of a second power supply unit (item 6 and/or items 5 and 6) charged with power received by the power reception device (at least item 6 is charged with power received by the reception device) and control the power conversion unit (2, pars [50-51]), and configured to execute power feeding control for controlling the supply power via the power conversion unit (2) such that the terminal voltage comes to a target voltage (fig.3, pars [50-51]; control of DC/AC conversion unit 2 such that the voltage reaches the set voltage command value), wherein the control unit is configured to:
cause the power transmission unit to transmit predetermined power to the power reception device, and acquire the information (par [50]; acquiring the load voltage information Vx), before executing the power feeding control (pars [47-50]; i.e., the predetermined power transmitted to the reception device before executing power feeding control of the power conversion unit 2 as a result of acquiring the terminal voltage/load voltage information Vx. Examiner note: the claim does not define “predetermined power” and how it is realized. Since Nakanishi teaches controlling the inverter 2 to apply AC voltage at a set frequency at the startup and causing the transmission unit to transmit the initial power, Nakanishi obviously meets the broadest reasonable interpretation of “predetermined power” as it is not transmitting random power), the information being derived based on a time-series transition of the terminal voltage (the recitation of “being derived based on a time-series transition of the terminal voltage” is a feature of the unclaimed receiver as the transmitter is only required to acquire the information-The Nakanishi transmitter receives/acquires load voltage information and thus meets the claim language as currently presented. It is further noted that Nakanishi’s load voltage information Vx measurement and feedback is continuous- it is constantly repeating over time as the capacitor cycles through charge and discharge-i.e., time-series transition) in a case where the predetermined power is transmitted (pars [47-50]); and
control the supply power during the power feeding control based on the acquired information (pars [50-51]; control the supply via item 2 during the power feeding control based on the acquired information).
Nakanishi teaches acquiring information read on by the load voltage information/terminal voltage before executing the power feeding control. While this could be broadly understood as “characteristic” information of an undefined system that charges the second power supply unit. Nakanishi, however, does not explicitly disclose the information acquired is a “characteristic” information of a system that charges the second power supply unit.
Draak, however, teaches it is known in the art for the power transmission unit (see fig.2, pars [67-69]) to acquire characteristic information of a system that charges the load (pars [140, 167-174]; the power transmission unit acquires characteristic information of a system read on by the at least the receiver configuration data of a system such as the Cs, Ls, Rs… that charges the load).
Kim, however, teaches it is known in the art for the power transmission unit (see figs.1, 4) to acquire characteristic information of a system that charges the load (pars [76, 99-108]; with regard to acquiring identifier information which may include a product type, various information, charging scheme, type of second power supply unit, impedance value of the load, information about a characteristic of the target resonator of the receiver device 120, information on input voltage value and input current value of the rectification unit 122 of the receiver device).
In the combination, Nakanishi would be modified to, in addition to the load voltage information, further acquire characteristic information of an undefined system as discussed within Draak or Kim before executing the power feeding control noting that the derivation of the characteristic information is a feature of the unclaimed receiver and the “based on a time-series transition of the terminal voltage” is present within the combination as the second power supply unit of Nakanishi goes through a continuous time-series transition. Further, Nakanishi’s control of the supply power during the feeding control would further be “based on” the combination’s acquired characteristic information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Nakanishi to that of Draak or Kim. The motivation would have been to optimize and ensure the efficiency of the energy transfer and safe operation of the system. The more information the power transmission unit acquires, the more accurate and robust the control of the supply power will be.
Regarding Claim 2,
The combination of Nakanishi in view of Draak or Kim teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 1 and further teaches wherein the characteristic information includes transfer function information related to a transfer function of the system (Nakanishi, pars [47-48, 50], Draak, pars [167-175] or Kim, pars [76, 101-108]; Draak teaches the characteristic information includes transfer function information such as receiver coil properties, receiver configuration data such as Cs, Ls, Rs related to a transfer function of the system. Or, Kim teaches transfer function information including charging scheme, impedance value of the load, characteristic target of the target resonator, amount of power to be used, information on input voltage value and input current value of the rectification unit 122 of the receiver device related to the transfer function of the system), and the control unit is configured to control the supply power during the power feeding control based on the transfer function information (Nakanishi, pars [50-51], Draak, pars [167-175] or Kim, pars [76, 99-108]; Nakanishi teaches the control unit controlling the supply power during the power feeding control via controlling the power conversion unit 2 based on the load voltage information Vx. Draak teaches controlling the supply power based on the acquired characteristic information or Kim teaches controlling the respective power supply provided to the source resonator 116 in order to transmit charging power based on the “transfer function” information. Therefore, the combination’s control of supply power is “based on” transfer function information).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakanishi et al. (2021/0399583 A1) in view of Draak et al. (2022/0337093 A1) or Kim et al. (2012/0286726 A1) further in view of Nakamura et al. (2017/0256993 A1).
Regarding Claim 6,
The combination of Nakanishi in view of Draak or Kim teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 1 and it is implied that the predetermined power is constant power (Nakanishi, pars [42, 45, 48], Draak, pars [69, 72], and Kim, pars [99, 104]). While it is implied that the predetermined power is constant power, the combination does not explicitly state “constant power”.
Nakamura, however, teaches it is known in the art to for the transmission unit to output constant power (par [90]).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention have combined the teachings of Nakanishi in view of Draak or Kim to that of Nakamura. The motivation would have been to fill in the gaps in the teachings of the combination of Nakanishi in view of Draak or Kim and to further illustrate the obviousness of having the predetermined power to be supplied at constant power to ensure that the power delivered to the receiver side is/remains stable.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakanishi et al. (2021/0399583 A1) in view of Draak et al. (2022/0337093 A1) or Kim et al. (2012/0286726 A1) further in view of Seong et al. (2020/0338995 A1).
Regarding Claim 7,
The combination of Nakanishi in view of Draak or Kim teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 1 and Nakanishi further teaches wherein the power transmission device is provided in a vehicle (Nakanishi, pars [2, 42]) and the first power supply unit (see rejection of claim 1). Nakanishi in view of Draak or Kim does not teach the vehicle having an electric motor as a drive source driven by power of the first power supply unit/battery 101.
Seong, however, teaches it is known in the art for the vehicle to have an electric motor as a drive source driven by power of the first power supply unit/battery (pars [3, 54]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Nakanishi in view of Draak or Kim to further including an electric motor as a drive source driven by the power of the first power supply/battery. The motivation would have been to provide a well-known and well-desired electric vehicle arrangement that predictably enables electric driving of a vehicle motor from the vehicle battery as discussed within Seong.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable (subject to corrections of the claim objections above) if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims (i.e., claim 2).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to dependent claim 3, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination does not explicitly disclose “wherein the transfer function information is information indicating a pole and a zero of the transfer function, and the control unit is configured to control the supply power based on the information indicating the pole and the zero such that a phase margin is 0 degree or more.”
Dependent claims 4 and 5 depend on claim 3 and are therefore indicated as allowable for similar reasons.
Prior Art Deemed Relevant, but not currently relied upon:
Govindaraj (2022/0360109)- figs.13-14, par [101], figs.13-14, teaches a suitable transfer function may be designed based on desired pole and zero positions.
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
/REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836