DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 4, 6 objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 2, the claim should be amended: “…to bring the output voltage to [[a]]the predetermined voltage,” since the element is already introduced in claim 1.
Re claim 4, the claim should be amended with reference to the first regulator constant voltage mode: “(A) a constant voltage mode for detecting [[an]]the output voltage from the first regulator, controlling the rectified voltage based on the detected output voltage to bring the output voltage to [[a]]the predetermined voltage, and outputting the output voltage;” to avoid repeated introduction of elements already introduced in claim 1. The claim should also be amended to consistently refer to the operation mode switching signal: “wherein the first regulator further includes a first communication circuit that transmits an operation mode switching signal to the second regulator or receives [[an]]the operation mode switching signal from the second regulator, at time of selectively switching between the constant voltage mode and the constant current mode, wherein the second regulator further includes a second communication circuit that transmits [[an]]the operation mode switching signal to the first regulator or receives [[an]]the operation mode switching signal from the first regulator at time of selectively switching between the fixed time ratio mode and the constant current mode”. If Applicant intends instead to refer to different signals, then the claims could also be amended to use different names for different signals.
Re claim 6, the claim should be amended to correct grammar: “…as claimed in claim 1,”. Note also the rejection for improper dependent claims for claims 6-9 below which takes precedence.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 6-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Re claims 6-9, the claims are improper because they fail to further limit the subject matter of claims 1 or 4 upon which they respectively depend. As drafted, the claims appear to merely refer to and repeat introduction of the same subcomponents of the system already claimed in claims 1 and 4, respectively. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Non-Patent Literature: “Pre- and Post-Regulation control of high-frequency magnetic-resonance wireless power transfer system with Class-D rectifier” (specific reference is made to copy provided with Applicant’s IDS), hereinafter Hara.
Re Claim 1. Hara teaches a wireless power transmission system (see Hara: Figs. 2a, 5) comprising:
a wireless power transmitter circuit (transmitter, see Hara: pg. 2, Fig. 2a); and
a wireless power receiver circuit (receiver, see Hara: pg. 2, Fig. 2a), wherein the wireless power transmitter circuit comprises:
an inverter (class-E inverter) that includes a first LC resonance circuit (<C1>, <L1>) including a power transmitting inductor (<L1>), that switches an input voltage (voltage at input of Class-E inverter) at a predetermined switching frequency and a predetermined duty ratio, and that transmits a switched AC voltage from the power transmitting inductor (see Hara: pgs. 2-3, 5, Figs. 2-3, Table I regarding inverter switched with predetermined duty cycle Ds at frequency finv to generate AC voltage for wireless power transmission),
wherein the wireless power receiver circuit comprises:
a rectifier circuit (Class-D rectifier) that includes a second LC resonance circuit (<L2>, <C2>) including a power receiving inductor (<L2>) electromagnetically coupled with the power transmitting inductor, that rectifies an AC voltage received by the power receiving inductor, and that outputs a rectified voltage (see Hara: pgs. 2-3, Fig. 2a regarding inductive coupling for wireless power transmission and rectification of induced AC voltage), and
a first regulator (post-regulator) that detects an output voltage (<Vo>) from the first regulator, that controls the rectified voltage based on the detected output voltage to bring the output voltage to a predetermined voltage, and that outputs the output voltage (see Hara: pgs. 2-3, 4-5, Figs. 2, 5 regarding post-regulator buck converter duty cycle Dpost control based on feedback/detected output voltage Vo to regulate output voltage constant). See Hara: pgs. 2-5, Figs. 2-3, 5, Table I. Note that a large number of prior art references would similarly anticipate the recited claim limitations, some of which are cited below.
Re Claim 2. Hara teaches the wireless power transmission system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first regulator comprises a first current control transistor (transistor <Spost>, see Hara: Fig. 2(a)) that controls a current related to an AC voltage from the rectifier circuit, and that controls the rectified voltage to bring the output voltage to a predetermined voltage, based on the detected output voltage, by controlling a duty ratio (duty ratio <Dpost>) of a control signal (transistor drive signal <vgpost>) for a control terminal (gate of <Spost>) of the first current control transistor (see Hara: pgs. 2-3, 4-5, Figs. 2-3, 5, regarding post-regulator buck converter receiving current/voltage from the rectified AC voltage and controlling buck converter’s transistor duty cycle Dpost based on feedback/detected output voltage Vo to regulate output voltage constant).
Re Claim 3. Hara teaches the wireless power transmission system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the inverter includes a class-E inverter, an inverse class-E inverter, a class-EF inverter, or an inverse class-E anti-coupled oscillation inverter (see Hara: pgs. 2-3, Fig. 2a regarding Class-E inverter), wherein the rectifier circuit includes a class-D rectifier circuit, a class-E rectifier circuit, or a class-EF rectifier circuit (see Hara: pgs. 2-3, Fig. 2a regarding Class-D rectifier), and wherein the first regulator includes a DC-DC converter (see Hara: pgs. 2-3, Fig. 2a regarding buck DC-DC converter post-regulator).
Re Claims 6. Hara teaches a wireless power transmitter circuit for the wireless power transmission system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the wireless power transmitter circuit includes the inverter (see discussion of claim 1 regarding redundant limitations).
Re Claim 7. Hara teaches a wireless power receiver circuit for the wireless power transmission system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver circuit includes the rectifier circuit and the first regulator (see discussion of claim 1 regarding redundant limitations).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 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 and upon addressing the noted Objections.
Claims 8-9 are currently rejected under 35 USC 112(d) for being improper dependent claims, but could potentially be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 4th paragraph, set forth in this Office action while still including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 4 would be allowable over the prior art of record because the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, does not teach, suggest, or render obvious a wireless power transmission system having transmitter and receiver circuits as recited in claim 1, and further “wherein the second regulator includes a second current control transistor, wherein the second regulator has, as operation modes: (A) a constant current mode for detecting an output current from the second regulator, controlling the input voltage to bring the output current to a predetermined current by controlling the second current control transistor based on the detected output current, and outputting the output current to the inverter; and (B) a fixed time ratio mode for controlling the input voltage by controlling the second current control transistor at a constant duty ratio, and outputting the output voltage to the inverter, wherein the first regulator has, as operation modes:(A) a constant voltage mode for detecting an output voltage from the first regulator, controlling the rectified voltage based on the detected output voltage to bring the output voltage to a predetermined voltage, and outputting the output voltage; and (B) a constant current mode for detecting an output current from the first regulator, controlling the rectified voltage based on the detected output current to bring the output current to a predetermined current, and outputting the output voltage, wherein the first regulator further includes a first communication circuit that transmits an operation mode switching signal to the second regulator or receives an operation mode switching signal from the second regulator, at time of selectively switching between the constant voltage mode and the constant current mode, wherein the second regulator further includes a second communication circuit that transmits an operation mode switching signal to the first regulator or receives an operation mode switching signal from the first regulator at time of selectively switching between the fixed time ratio mode and the constant current mode, wherein, when the first regulator operates in the constant voltage mode, the second regulator operates in the fixed time ratio mode, and wherein, when the first regulator operates in the constant current mode, the second regulator operates in the constant current mode”.
The closest prior art of record includes Hara, as well as Lu (CN112421793A), and Dibben (US2012/0175967), which disclose prior art resonant wireless power transmission system wherein the transmitter includes a second regulator prior to the inverter as well as the first regulator after the rectifier. Although the prior art systems disclose that is known for the systems to have the first regulator able to switch between constant voltage mode and constant current mode regulation as recited, and disclose systems which may communicate between the transmitter and receiver to coordinate switching of the two regulators, the prior art does not sufficiently teach or suggest that the two regulators communicate mode switching signals and operate together such that when the first regulator is in constant voltage mode the second regulator operates in fixed time ratio mode and when the first regulator operates in constant current mode the second regulator operates in constant current mode as recited. Claim 4, in light of Applicant’s Specification and Drawings, therefore would overcome the cited prior art of record.
Claim 5 would be allowable for being dependent on claim 4.
Claims 8-9 are currently rejected under 35 USC 112(d) for being improper dependent claims, but could potentially be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 4th paragraph, set forth in this Office action while still including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims required by claims 1 and 4.
Conclusion
In summary, it is recommended Applicant consider the cited prior art of record, and consider incorporating the indicated subject matter in any independent claims to overcome the cited prior art of record. Applicant should also ensure the claims address the noted Objections and issues under 35 USC 112(d) as appropriate.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lu (CN112421793A) and Dibben (US2012/0175967) also disclose resonant wireless power transmission systems with first and second regulators that may operate for load constant voltage control, and other relevant features.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID A SHIAO whose telephone number is (571)270-7265. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 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, 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.
/DAVID A SHIAO/Examiner, Art Unit 2836 /REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
