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 .
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 1-8 are 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.
The claims recite the language “in a case that” it is unclear the subsequent language is optional or a required operation of the device or method. It is suggested Applicant adopt the language “when” as clear alternative.
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.
Claims 1, 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitiani et al. (US 20220285964) in view of Brodbeck (US 20240348065) in view of Lee et al. (US 20230318068).
With respect to claims 1 and 7-8 Mitiani teaches an electrical power supply system, comprising: a first electrical power supply circuit (formed with 14a and 32aa) configured to supply to a first load device (12a) an electrical power output from a first electrical power generating device (14a), the electrical power being a direct current electrical power (see battery and capacitor output to loads); a first electrical power storage device (17a) connected to the first electrical power supply circuit and in parallel (see parallel connection shown in Fig. 1) with the first electrical power generating device; a second electrical power supply circuit (formed with 14b and 32aa) configured to supply to a second load device (12b) an electrical power output from a second electrical power generating device (14b), the electrical power being a direct current electrical power; a second electrical power storage device (17b) connected to the second electrical power supply circuit and in parallel (see connection shown in Fig. 1) with the second electrical power generating device (14b); a connection circuit (32-34, 52 with connection buses equipped with a connection device (27a/b) configured to connect the first electrical power supply circuit and the second electrical power supply circuit; a control device equipped with one or more processors (paragraph 0052-54) that execute computer-executable instructions stored in a memory (see program storage paragraph 0054), wherein the one or more processors execute the computer- executable instructions (programming) to cause the control device to execute a connection control (see controlling transistor and interconnecting switches 63-69) on the connection device in order to connect the first electrical power supply circuit and the second electrical power supply circuit via the connection circuit. Mitiani further teaches the use of the one or more processors cause the control device to execute the connection control on the connection device after executing a precharging control (paragraph 0036, 46-48) on the first electrical power generating device and the second electrical power generating device. Mitiani does not teach the connection with an external charger. Brodbeck teaches the known use of a external charger (paragraph 0043) connecting to charge first and second electrical power storage devices (see Fig. 4: 204) when required. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Mitiani to include the use of external charger for the benefit of ensuring the energy storage is recharged and maintained. Mitiani and Brodbeck do not teach the determining of charge balancing however do not teach a voltage difference threshold and charging with the generating device. Lee teaches the a difference between a voltage of the first electrical power supply circuit and a voltage of the second electrical power supply circuit is greater than or equal to a predetermined first voltage threshold value (see paragraph 0035), the one or more processors cause the control device to execute the connection control on the connection device (see control of switches 16) the control being a control in which the first electrical power storage device is charged by the electrical power output from the first electrical power generating device (see output of one source charging a distinct battery Fig. 2A) and the second electrical power storage device (see active balancing with a second battery) is charged by the electrical power output from the second electrical power generating device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify Mitiani and Brodbeck to balance the supply of power prior to connecting of a power generating device to balance the supply for the benefit of battery health and increasing system run time by increasing the total useable charge in the battery pack (paragraph 0032).
With respect to claims 4-6 Mitiani as modified above teaches the external charger however does not teach the disconnection device. The use of a device to disconnect and connected the external charger from the power system is well known for isolating and protecting the system when not in use of which the Examiner takes Official Notice. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to further modify Mitiani to include disconnection device for the benefit of isolating and protecting the system when not in use.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 2 Mitiani teaches the electrical power supply however does not teach wherein, in the case that the electrical power output from the external charging device is required to be supplied to the first electrical power storage device and the second electrical power storage device, and the difference between the voltage of the first electrical power supply circuit and the voltage of the second electrical power supply circuit is greater than or equal to the predetermined first voltage threshold value, the one or more processors cause the control device to execute the connection control on the connection device after executing the precharging control on the first electrical power generating device and the second electrical power charging device until the difference between the voltage of the first electrical power supply circuit and the voltage of the second electrical power supply circuit becomes less than a predetermined second voltage threshold value. At least this further limitation is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record.
With respect to claim 3 Mitiani teaches the electrical power supply however does not teach each of the first electrical power generating device and the second electrical power generating device includes an electrical power generator and an internal combustion engine configured to drive the electrical power generator; and in a case that the internal combustion engine is in an idling state, the one or more processors cause the control device to execute the precharging control on the first electrical power generating device and the second electrical power generating device. At least this further limitation is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Fin whose telephone number is (571)272-5921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30.
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 571-272-7429. 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.
MICHAEL FIN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2836
/MICHAEL R. FIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights