DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
This office action is a non-final rejection in response to the filing of the applicant’s response to the election / restriction requirement filed on 04/20/2026. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species L (Fig 28, claims 1-20) in the reply filed on 04/20/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 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.
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-7,10,14-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stouffer US PG-Publication (US 2017/0361110 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Stouffer discloses a wireless power transfer device (see Figs 1-8, particularly Fig 8), comprising:
a coil assembly (102), comprising a first transmitting coil (126) and a first container (housing 102) containing the first transmitting coil (126) (see Fig 8 and par. [0035]-[0040]);
an electronics assembly (104), comprising a plurality of electronic components (64,72,140,142,68,802) and a second container (housing 104) containing the plurality of electronic components (64,72,140,142,68,802) (see Fig 8 and par. [0035]-[0040]); and
a cable (806) physically coupling the first container (housing 102) to the second container (housing 104), the first transmitting coil (126) being electrically coupled to at least one of the plurality of electronic components (64,72,140,142,68,802) through the cable (806) (see Fig 8 and par. [0035]-[0040]),
PNG
media_image1.png
491
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in addition, while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (The absence of a disclosure in a prior art reference relating to function did not defeat the Board's finding of anticipation of claimed apparatus because the limitations at issue were found to be inherent in the prior art reference); see also In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29 (CCPA 1971); In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959). "Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). (see MPEP 2114).
Furthermore, it has been held that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Exparte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). (See MPEP 2114)).
Regarding Claim 2, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power transfer device (Fig 8) is a wearable device configured to be secured to a patient (see Figs 1-8, par. [0002],[0007], [0035]; claim 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 1, wherein the first container (housing 102) further contains a second transmitting coil (128) electrically coupled to at least one of the plurality of electronic components (64,72,140,142,68,802) through the cable (806), the first (126) and second transmitting coils (128) being oriented along non-parallel axes (see Fig 8 and par. [0035]-[0040]).
Regarding Claim 4, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 3, wherein the plurality of electronic components (64,72,140,142,68,802) comprises a driver (64), and wherein the cable (806) comprises a first wire (see wires connected to Vcoil+,Vcoil-, in connector 108/122) electrically coupled between the driver (64) and the first transmitting coil (126) (see Fig 8 and par. [0021],[0035]-[0040]),
a second wire (see wire connected at Va+,Va- via connector 108/122) electrically coupled between the driver (64) and the second transmitting coil (128) (see Fig 8 and par. [0021],[0035]-[0040]), and
a sheath (108/122) at least partly enclosing the first (see wires connected to Vcoil+,Vcoil-, in connector 108/122) and second wires (see wire connected at Va+,Va- via connector 108/122) (see Fig 8 and par. [0021],[0035]-[0040]).
Regarding Claim 5, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 4, wherein the cable (806) comprises a first twisted pair of wires (Fig 8 and par. [0034]) comprising the first wire and a third wire, the first and third wires being electrically coupled, at one end, to the driver and, at another end, to respective ends of the first transmitting coil (126) (see Fig 8 and par. [0021],[0034]-[0040]).
Regarding Claim 6, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 3, wherein the plurality of electronic components (64,72,140,142,68,802) comprises a driver (64) electrically coupled to the first (126) and second transmitting coils (128) and configured to differentially drive the first and second transmitting coils (126,128) to generate a magnetic field (66) (see Fig 8 and par.[0034]-[0040]).
Regarding Claim 7, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 1, wherein the plurality of electronics components (64,72,140,142,68,802) comprise:
a power source (Va+,Va-) (see Fig 8 and par.[0034]-[0040]);
a driver (64) coupled to the power source (Va+,Va-) and configured to provide a first AC current to the first transmitting coil (126) through the cable (806) (see Fig 8 and par.[0034]-[0040]);
a wireless receiver (68) (see Fig 8 and par.[0034]-[0040]); and
a controller (72) operatively coupled to the driver (64) and configured to control one or more parameters of the first AC current (see Fig 8 and par.[0034]-[0040]).
Regarding Claim 10, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 9, wherein the wireless power transfer device (Fig 8) is a wearable device configured to be secured to a patient (see Figs 1-8, par. [0002],[0007], [0035]; claim 1).
Regarding Claim 14, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 9, comprising a driver (64) configured to differentially drive the first (126) and second (128) transmitting coils to generate a magnetic field (66) (see Fig 8 and par.[0034]-[0040]).
Regarding Claim 15, Stouffer discloses a wireless power transfer device (see Figs 1-8, particularly Fig 8), comprising:
a coil assembly (102) containing a first transmitting coil (126) (see Fig 8 and par.[0034]-[0040]);
an electronics assembly (104) containing at least one electronics component (64,72,140,142,68,802) electrically coupled to the coil assembly (104), the electronics assembly (104) being spaced apart from the coil assembly (102) (see connection via cable 806) (see Fig 8 and par.[0034]-[0040]); and
a first LC circuit (see inductor / capacitor in 126) comprising a first capacitor (capacitor in parallel with coil 126) in the coil assembly (102) and coupled to the first transmitting coil (126) (see Fig 8 and par. [0035]-[0040]),
PNG
media_image1.png
491
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in addition, while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (The absence of a disclosure in a prior art reference relating to function did not defeat the Board's finding of anticipation of claimed apparatus because the limitations at issue were found to be inherent in the prior art reference); see also In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29 (CCPA 1971); In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959). "Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). (see MPEP 2114).
Furthermore, it has been held that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Exparte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). (See MPEP 2114)).
Regarding Claim 16, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 15, wherein the wireless power transfer device is a wearable device configured to be secured to a patient (see Figs 1-8, par. [0002],[0007], [0035]; claim 1).
Regarding Claim 17, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 15, wherein the first capacitor (capacitor in parallel with coil 126) is coupled in parallel to the first transmitting coil (126), and the at least one electronics component (64,72,140,142,68,802) comprises a driver (64) configured to provide AC current to the first LC circuit (see inductor / capacitor in 126) (see Fig 8 and par. [0035]-[0040]).
Regarding Claim 20, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 15, comprising a cable (806) physically and electrically coupling the coil assembly (102) to the electronics assembly (104) (see Fig 8 and par.[0034]-[0040]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
7. Claims 8-9,11-13 and 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stouffer US PG-Publication (US 2017/0361110 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 1;
Stouffer does not clearly discloses wherein a length of the cable is at least 5 times a length of the first transmitting coil.
However, Stouffer discloses in the fig 8 that the length of cable 806 is substantially longer compared with the transmitting coil (126), probably longer than 5 times (see Fig 8; par. [0035]-[0042]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stouffer by including wherein a length of the cable is at least 5 times a length of the first transmitting coil, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F .2d272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Furthermore, Stouffer discloses that modifications can be performed in par. [0042]: Although particular embodiments of the present invention have been shown and described, it should be understood that the above discussion is not intended to limit the present invention to these embodiments. It will be obvious to those skilled in the art that various changes and modifications may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. Thus, the present invention is intended to cover equivalents that may fall within the spirit and scope of the present invention as defined by the claims.
Regarding Claim 9, Stouffer discloses a wireless power transfer system (Fig 8) comprising a wireless power transfer device (Fig 8), the wireless power transfer device comprising:
a first transmitting coil (126) oriented along a first axis (Fig 8; par. [0034]-[0042]);
a second transmitting coil (128) on the first transmitting coil (126) and oriented along a second axis different from the first axis (see Fig 8 disclosing the second coil 128 oriented in a second axis) (Fig 8; par. [0034]-[0042]); and
at least one electronic component at a low-angle magnetic field plane (66) parallel to the first and second axes where, when at least one of the first (126) or second transmitting coils (128) are driven with AC current (Fig 8; par. [0010], [0034]-[0042]), an angle between a magnetic field (66) generated by the at least one of the first (126) or second transmitting coils (128) (Fig 8; par. [0034]-[0042], one ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that there is an angle between coils, and Stouffer discloses alignment circuitry,
[0010]: Vcoil across the external charger's charging coil 52 can also be assessed by alignment circuitry 70 to determine how well the external charger 50 is aligned relative to the IMD 10. This is important, because if the external charger 50 is not well aligned to the IMD 10, the magnetic field 66 produced by the charging coil 52 will not efficiently be received by the charging coil 36 in the IMD 10. Efficiency in power transmission can be quantified as the “coupling” between the transmitting coil 52 and the receiving coil 36 (k, which ranges between 0 and 1), which generally speaking comprises the extent to which power expended at the transmitting coil 52 in the external charger 50 is received at the receiving coil 36 in the IMD 10. It is generally desired that the coupling between coils 52 and 36 be as high as possible: higher coupling results in faster charging of the IMD battery 14 with the least expenditure of power in the external charger 50);
Stouffer does not clearly disclose at least one electronic component at a low-angle magnetic field plane parallel to the first and second axes where, when at least one of the first or second transmitting coils are driven with AC current, an angle between a magnetic field generated by the at least one of the first or second transmitting coils to the low-angle magnetic field plane is less than 20 degrees.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stouffer by including at least one electronic component at a low-angle magnetic field plane parallel to the first and second axes where, when at least one of the first or second transmitting coils are driven with AC current, an angle between a magnetic field generated by the at least one of the first or second transmitting coils to the low-angle magnetic field plane is less than 20 degrees, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F .2d272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Furthermore, Stouffer discloses that modifications can be performed in par. [0042]: Although particular embodiments of the present invention have been shown and described, it should be understood that the above discussion is not intended to limit the present invention to these embodiments. It will be obvious to those skilled in the art that various changes and modifications may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. Thus, the present invention is intended to cover equivalents that may fall within the spirit and scope of the present invention as defined by the claims.
Regarding Claim 11, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 9, wherein the low-angle magnetic field plane (66) extends between the first (126) and second transmitting coils (128) (Fig 8; par. [0034]-[0042]).
Regarding Claim 12, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 9, wherein the low-angle magnetic field plane extends through a magnetic field shallow zone within the wireless power transfer device (Fig 8) and angularly positioned in a plan view between a portion of the first transmitting coil and a portion of the second transmitting coil, and where a magnitude of the magnetic field is substantially less than a magnitude of magnetic field at an end of the at least one of the first (126) or second transmitting coils (128) (Fig 8; par. [0034]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stouffer by including wherein the low-angle magnetic field plane extends through a magnetic field shallow zone within the wireless power transfer device and angularly positioned in a plan view between a portion of the first transmitting coil and a portion of the second transmitting coil, and where a magnitude of the magnetic field is substantially less than a magnitude of magnetic field at an end of the at least one of the first or second transmitting coils, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F .2d272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 13, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 9, wherein the at least one electronic component comprises a capacitor (131) or a current sensor (see Fig 8 and par. [0024]-[0025]).
Regarding Claim 19, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 15, comprising:
a second LC circuit (see 131 / 128) comprising a second capacitor (131) in the coil assembly (102), electrically coupled to the second transmitting coil (128), and electrically coupled to the at least one electronics component in the electronics assembly (see Fig 8; par. [0034]-[0042]);
Stouffer does not clearly discloses a second transmitting coil in the coil assembly and above the first transmitting coil, the first and second transmitting coils being respectively oriented along non-parallel axes;
However, one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that the location of the second transmitting coil in the coil assembly and above the first transmitting coil, the first and second transmitting coils being respectively oriented along non-parallel axes could be varied, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Furthermore, the claimed location of the second transmitting coil does not appear to produce any unexpected results.
8. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stouffer US PG-Publication (US 2017/0361110 A1) in view of Cook et al US PG-Publication (2009/0224609 A1).
Regarding Claim 18, Stouffer discloses the wireless power transfer device of claim 15;
Stouffer does not clearly discloses further comprising a first current sensor in the coil assembly, configured to measure a current flowing through the first transmitting coil, and electrically coupled to the at least one electronics component in the electronics assembly.
However, Cook et al is an analogous art pertinent to the problem to be solved in this application in which discloses packaging and details of a wireless power device (see Figs 1-5) and further discloses a first current sensor (435) in the coil assembly (430: 431,432), configured to measure a current flowing through the first transmitting coil (431), and electrically coupled to the at least one electronics component (420,440) in the electronics assembly (420,440) (see Fig 4; abstract and par. [0019]; claim 1).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Stouffer with the teaching of Cook et al by including a first current sensor in the coil assembly, configured to measure a current flowing through the first transmitting coil, and electrically coupled to the at least one electronics component in the electronics assembly in order to the current sensor senses the amount of current through the antenna. That amount of current is then used to adjust characteristics of the transmitting or receiving (Cook et al, abstract).
Examiner Note
9. The examiner cites particular columns and lines numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the cited prior art in the PTO-892 form attached.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFONSO PEREZ BORROTO whose telephone number is (571) 270-1714. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (9am-4pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Taelor Kim can be reached on (571) 270-7166. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ALFONSO PEREZ BORROTO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights