DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
2. Claims 1-8 and 13-17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the claim limitation “…the at least one electric consumer.” should be “…the at least one electrical consumer.” according to antecedent basis requirement.
Dependent claims 2-8, 16 and 17 are also objected to at least the same reason as objected independent claim 1 as stated above because the dependent claims 2-8, 16 and 17 are depending on the objected independent claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, the claim limitation “…the electric consumer…” should be “…the at least one electrical consumer.” according to antecedent basis requirement.
Regarding claim 13, the claim limitation “…the rechargeable buffer storage device…” should be “…a rechargeable buffer storage device…” according to antecedent basis requirement.
Regarding claim 14, the claim limitation “…at least one electric consumer…” should be “…at least one electrical consumer…” according to antecedent basis requirement.
Regarding claim 15, the claim limitation “…the electric consumer…” should be “…the at least one electrical consumer.” according to antecedent basis requirement.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claims 1, 4-6, 8-10 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huhn et al. (2023/0155423, cited by Applicant in the IDS submitted on Mar. 19, 2025) (Hereinafter “Huhn”).
Regarding claim 1, Huhn discloses a road construction machine (for example - 118 in Fig.1, please refer to the whole reference for detailed) comprising: an electric drive (machine of 118 in Fig.1; please refer to at least ¶ 5 and 36) for driving the road construction machine and/or at least one electrical consumer (electrical consumer which consumes power from the batteries; please refer to at least ¶ 5, 36 and 37), and a receiving device (192 of 118) for electrical energy, wherein the receiving device is configured to wirelessly receive electrical energy from an external transmitting device (192 of 220) and to forward the electrical energy to the electric drive and/or the at least one electric consumer (please refer to at least ¶ 5, 13, 36 and 37).
Regarding claim 4, Huhn discloses the receiving device (192 of 118) is configured to receive electrical energy wirelessly during a paving run of the road construction machine (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, Huhn discloses at least one rechargeable buffer storage device (190 of 118 in Fig.1; please refer to at least ¶ 13, 36 and 37), wherein the rechargeable buffer storage device is configured to receive and store electrical energy from the receiving device and to supply the electric drive and/or the electric consumer with electrical energy (please refer to at least ¶ 5, 13, 36 and 37).
Regarding claim 6, Huhn discloses a receiving position monitoring unit (120 in Fig.1 (or) “other centralized monitor in communication with both machine” as stated in ¶ 46) for monitoring a receiving device position (position of 192 of 118) and a transmitting device position (position of 192 of 220), wherein the road construction machine (118) is configured to determine a transmission distance (distance between 118 and 220) for wirelessly transmitting electrical energy between the transmitting device position and the receiving device position (please refer to at least ¶ 46 and 47).
Regarding claim 8, Huhn discloses an energy forwarding device (192 of 118 can be energy forwarding device) for wirelessly forwarding the electrical energy from the receiving device (192 of 118) and/or the at least one rechargeable buffer storage device (190 of 118; please refer to at least ¶ 13, 36 and 37) to a second road construction machine (for example other road construction machine except from 118 shown in Fig.1).
Regarding claim 9, Huhn discloses a system (Fig.1, please refer to the whole reference for detailed) for wirelessly supplying a first road construction machine (for example 118 in Fig.1) with electrical energy, comprising: a first road construction machine (118) comprising a first receiving device (192 of 118) for wirelessly receiving electrical energy, an external transmitting device (192 of 220) for wirelessly transmitting electrical energy to the first receiving device, and an energy source (190 of 220) for supplying the external transmitting device with electrical energy (please refer to at least ¶ 13, 36 and 37).
Regarding claim 10, Huhn discloses the transmitting device (192 of 220) is stationary or mobile (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 13, Huhn discloses a second road construction machine (220) having a second receiving device (192 of 220) for wirelessly receiving electrical energy, wherein the first road construction machine (118) comprises an energy forwarding device for wirelessly forwarding the electrical energy from the first receiving device (192 of 118; due to 192 functions as to receive energy or to transmit energy; please refer to at least ¶ 36 and 37) and/or the rechargeable buffer storage device (190 of 118) to the second road construction machine (220; please refer to at least ¶ 13, 36 and 37).
Regarding claim 14, Huhn discloses a method (Fig.1, please refer to the whole reference for detailed) for operating a road construction machine (for example 118 in Fig.1), comprising: supplying an external transmitting device (220), which is arranged outside the road construction machine (118), with electrical energy via an energy source (190 of 220), wirelessly transmitting the electrical energy from the external transmitting device to a receiving device of the road construction machine (using 192 of 118 and 192 of 220), forwarding the electrical energy from the receiving device to an electric drive of the road construction machine and/or to at least one electric consumer of the road construction machine (please refer to at least ¶ 5 and 36), and moving the road construction machine via the electric drive and/or operating the at least one electrical consumer via the electrical energy (please refer to at least ¶ 5 and 36).
Regarding claim 15, Huhn discloses the road construction machine (118) comprises a buffer storage device (190 of 118) for storing electrical energy, wherein the receiving device (192 of 118) forwards the electrical energy to the buffer storage device (190), wherein the buffer storage device forwards the electrical energy to the electric drive and/or the electric consumer (please refer to at least ¶ 5 and 36).
Regarding claim 16, Huhn discloses the road construction machine (118) comprises a road paver for producing a paving layer from a paving material or a feeder vehicle for supplying the road paver with paving material (please refer to Fig.1 and at least ¶ 16).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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 of this title, 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.
6. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huhn et al. (2023/0155423) (Hereinafter “Huhn”) in view of Yoshida (2012/0299373).
Regarding claim 2, Huhn is used to reject claim 1 above.
Huhn discloses the receiving device (192 of 118; ¶ 36) as explained in claim 1 above.
Huhn doesn’t explicitly disclose the receiving device has a receiving antenna which is plate-shaped.
Yoshida discloses a receiving device (for example – 22a in Fig.5) has a receiving antenna which is plate-shaped (Fig.5; ¶ 40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huhn with the teaching of Yoshida to provide the receiving device has a receiving antenna which is plate-shaped. The suggestion/motivation would have been to support that a plate-shape receiving antenna is used for transferring power.
8. Claims 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huhn et al. (2023/0155423) (Hereinafter “Huhn”) in view of Su (12,451,726).
Regarding claim 3, Huhn is used to reject claim 1 above.
Huhn discloses the wirelessly transmitted electrical energy as explained in claim 1 above.
Huhn doesn’t explicitly disclose the wirelessly transmitted electrical energy comprises a plurality of bundled electrical signals.
Su discloses the wirelessly transmitted electrical energy (100 in Fig.2; 280 in Fig.3A) comprises a plurality of bundled electrical signals (electrical signals provided from 340s).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huhn with the teaching of Su to provide the wirelessly transmitted electrical energy comprises a plurality of bundled electrical signals. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use a plurality of coils to wirelessly transfer energy as supported by Su.
Regarding claim 17, Huhn is used to reject claim 14 above.
Huhn discloses the wirelessly transmitted electrical energy as explained in claim 14 above.
Huhn doesn’t explicitly disclose the wirelessly transmitted electrical energy comprises a plurality of bundled high-frequency electrical signals.
Su discloses the wirelessly transmitted electrical energy (100 in Fig.2; 280 in Fig.3A) comprises a plurality of bundled high-frequency electrical signals (high-frequency electrical signals provided from 340s).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huhn with the teaching of Su to provide the wirelessly transmitted electrical energy comprises a plurality of bundled electrical signals. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use a plurality of coils to wirelessly transfer energy as supported by Su.
9. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huhn et al. (2023/0155423) (Hereinafter “Huhn”) in view of Miller (11,110,812) and Niwa (11,088,574)
Regarding claim 7, Huhn is used to reject claims 1 and 6 above.
Huhn doesn’t explicitly disclose an object detector for detecting an object in the transmission distance.
Miller discloses an object detector for detecting an object (column 5, line 46-49).
Niwa discloses an object detector (290 in Fig.1) for detecting an object (please refer to at least column 5, line 34-59) in the transmission distance (distance between 10 and 20 in Fig.1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huhn with the teaching of Miller to provide an object detector and with the teaching of Niwa to provide an objector to detect an object in the transmission distance. The suggestion/motivation would have been to detect any foreign object in between the receiving device and the transmitting device as suggested by Niwa.
10. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huhn et al. (2023/0155423) (Hereinafter “Huhn”) in view of Miller (11,110,812).
Regarding claim 11, Huhn is used to reject claim 9 above.
Huhn discloses the transmitting device and the first receiving device as explained in the claim 9 above.
Huhn doesn’t explicitly disclose the transmitting device has a transmitting antenna and the first receiving device has a first receiving antenna, wherein the transmitting antenna is rotatably mounted with respect to the transmitting device and/or the first receiving antenna is rotatably mounted with respect to the first road construction machine in order to align the transmitting antenna and the first receiving antenna with respect to one another.
Miller discloses an example of the transmitting device (112 in Fig.5) has a transmitting antenna (502) and the first receiving device (110) has a first receiving antenna (500), wherein the transmitting antenna (502) is rotatably mounted (using 118; please refer to at least column 7, line 60 to column 8, line 11) with respect to the transmitting device (112) and/or the first receiving antenna is rotatably mounted with respect to the first road construction machine in order to align the transmitting antenna and the first receiving antenna with respect to one another (please refer to Figs.5 and 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huhn with the teaching of Miller to provide the transmitting device has a transmitting antenna and the first receiving device has a first receiving antenna, wherein the transmitting antenna is rotatably mounted with respect to the transmitting device and/or the first receiving antenna is rotatably mounted with respect to the first road construction machine in order to align the transmitting antenna and the first receiving antenna with respect to one another. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use rotatable arm to align the transmitting device and the receiving device as supported by Miller.
10. Claims 12 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huhn et al. (2023/0155423) (Hereinafter “Huhn”) in view of Miller (11,110,812) and Buschmann et al. (2017/0044726) (“Buschmann”).
Regarding claim 12, Huhn is used to reject claim 9 above.
Huhn discloses the transmitting device (192 of 220), the first receiving device (192 of 118) and a speed of the first road construction machine (118) relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is synchronized (¶ 46).
Huhn doesn’t explicitly disclose a distance between the transmitting device, comprising the transmitting antenna, and the first receiving device, comprising the first receiving antenna, is at most approximately 1000 m and/or a speed of the first road construction machine relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is at most approximately 20 m/min.
Miller discloses a distance between the transmitting device (112 in Fig.5), comprising the transmitting antenna (502), and the first receiving device (110), comprising the first receiving antenna (500), is at most approximately 1000 m (please refer to at least column 6, line 31-64).
For supporting purpose, Buschmann discloses a speed of a road construction machine is at most approximately 20 m/min (¶ 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huhn with the teaching of Miller to provide a distance between the transmitting device, comprising the transmitting antenna, and the first receiving device, comprising the first receiving antenna, is at most approximately 1000 m and with the teaching of Buschmann to recognize that the speed of the first road construction machine relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is at most approximately 20 m/min. The suggestion/motivation would have been to reduce a distance between the transmitting device and the receiving device before wireless charging is provided as supported by Miller.
Regarding claim 18, Huhn is used to reject claims 9 and 12 above.
Huhn discloses the transmitting device (192 of 220), the first receiving device (192 of 118) and a speed of the first road construction machine (118) relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is synchronized (¶ 46).
Huhn doesn’t explicitly disclose the distance between the transmitting device, comprising the transmitting antenna, and the first receiving device, comprising the first receiving antenna, is at most approximately 500 m and/or the speed of the first road construction machine relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is at most approximately 6 m/min.
Miller discloses the distance between the transmitting device (112 in Fig.5), comprising the transmitting antenna (502), and the first receiving device (110), comprising the first receiving antenna (500), is at most approximately 500 m (please refer to at least column 6, line 31-64).
For supporting purpose, Buschmann discloses a speed of a road construction machine is at most approximately 6 m/min (¶ 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huhn with the teaching of Miller to provide a distance between the transmitting device, comprising the transmitting antenna, and the first receiving device, comprising the first receiving antenna, is at most approximately 500 m and with the teaching of Buschmann to recognize that the speed of the first road construction machine relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is at most approximately 6 m/min. The suggestion/motivation would have been to reduce a distance between the transmitting device and the receiving device before wireless charging is provided as supported by Miller.
Regarding claim 19, Huhn is used to reject claims 9 and 12 above.
Huhn discloses the transmitting device (192 of 220), the first receiving device (192 of 118) and a speed of the first road construction machine (118) relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is synchronized (¶ 46).
Huhn doesn’t explicitly disclose the distance between the transmitting device, comprising the transmitting antenna, and the first receiving device, comprising the first receiving antenna, is at most approximately 100 m and/or the speed of the first road construction machine relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is at most approximately 20 m/min.
Miller discloses the distance between the transmitting device (112 in Fig.5), comprising the transmitting antenna (502), and the first receiving device (110), comprising the first receiving antenna (500), is at most approximately 100 m (please refer to at least column 6, line 31-64).
For supporting purpose, Buschmann discloses a speed of a road construction machine is at most approximately 20 m/min (¶ 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huhn with the teaching of Miller to provide a distance between the transmitting device, comprising the transmitting antenna, and the first receiving device, comprising the first receiving antenna, is at most approximately 100 m and with the teaching of Buschmann to recognize that the speed of the first road construction machine relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is at most approximately 20 m/min. The suggestion/motivation would have been to reduce a distance between the transmitting device and the receiving device before wireless charging is provided as supported by Miller.
Regarding claim 20, Huhn is used to reject claims 9 and 12 above.
Huhn discloses the transmitting device (192 of 220), the first receiving device (192 of 118) and the speed of the first road construction machine (118) relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is at most approximately 6 m/min (¶ 46; the speed would be very slow due to wireless charging is provided during the road construction).
Huhn doesn’t explicitly disclose the distance between the transmitting device, comprising the transmitting antenna, and the first receiving device, comprising the first receiving antenna, is at most approximately 100 m and/or the speed of the first road construction machine relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is at most approximately 6 m/min.
Miller discloses the distance between the transmitting device (112 in Fig.5), comprising the transmitting antenna (502), and the first receiving device (110), comprising the first receiving antenna (500), is at most approximately 100 m (please refer to at least column 6, line 31-64).
For supporting purpose, Buschmann discloses a speed of a road construction machine is at most approximately 6 m/min (¶ 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huhn with the teaching of Miller to provide a distance between the transmitting device, comprising the transmitting antenna, and the first receiving device, comprising the first receiving antenna, is at most approximately 100 m and with the teaching of Buschmann to recognize that the speed of the first road construction machine relative to the transmitting device during the receiving of electrical energy is at most approximately 6 m/min. The suggestion/motivation would have been to reduce a distance between the transmitting device and the receiving device before wireless charging is provided as supported by Miller.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD TAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7455. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached on 571-270-3684. 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.
/Richard Tan/Primary Examiner 2849
Prosecution Insights