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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/14/2025 and 11/07/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 USC 112(b) because it is unclear what length of width means. Length and width are two different measurements of a body and a measurement itself cannot have another measurement. Examiner interprets the claim as: charging apparatus and arm are on a platform.
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 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sato (20230166625).
For claim 1, Sato teaches: A charging system (abstract, disclosing a charging system) comprising:
a charger including a charging connector (abstract, disclosing a charging apparatus and connecting charging cable to vehicle. Hence it has a connector);
an arm mechanism that is capable of gripping the charging connector and moves the charging connector within a predetermined range (abstract, disclosing an arm mechanism configured to grasp a charging cable extending from the charging apparatus and connecting a charging cable to a vehicle-to-be-charged); and
a control device that controls the charger, the arm mechanism, and a plurality of vehicles (abstract, disclosing a control unit configured to indicate the vehicle-to-be-charged a charging position for connecting the charging cable thereto, in which the control unit is configured to give a parking position adjustment instruction to the vehicle-to-be-charged. [0035], disclosing management apparatus 10 includes a vehicle operation management unit 21, a vehicle information storage unit 22, a charging schedule management unit 23, a vehicle position control unit 24, and a charge port operation arm control unit),
wherein a portion of the charging connector gripped by the arm mechanism is arranged toward a side of the arm mechanism (abstract, disclosing an arm mechanism configured to grasp a charging cable extending from the charging apparatus and connecting a charging cable to a vehicle-to-be-charged. As arm connects the charging cable to a vehicle, charging connector is necessarily arranged toward a side of arm mechanism).
For claim 3, Sato teaches: The charging system according to claim 1, wherein the control device causes the vehicle to be parked such that a charging port of the vehicle faces a side of the charger within the predetermined range (abstract, disclosing a control unit configured to indicate the vehicle-to-be-charged a charging position for connecting the charging cable thereto. [0039], disclosing providing instruction to vehicle to move to charging area. Charging area is predetermined range because arm can only connect charging cable when vehicle is in charging area).
For claim 4, Sato teaches: The charging system according to claim 1, wherein a length of a width of a mount on which the charger and the arm mechanism are mounted is equal to a length of a width of the charger (figure 2, illustrating arms A1 and A1 and charging cables are on a platform).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Bacalia (US 20150118003).
For claim 2, Sato teaches: The charging system according to claim 1,
Sato does not teach: wherein an arm-side bracket openable and closable and provided with a tapered pin on an inner side is attached to a distal end of the arm mechanism, a connector-side bracket provided with a tapered hole on an outer side is attached to a proximal end of the charging connector, and
the arm mechanism grips the connector-side bracket by the arm-side bracket and grips the charging connector by inserting the tapered pin into the tapered hole.
Bacalia teaches: an arm-side bracket openable and closable and provided with a tapered pin on an inner side is attached to a distal end of the arm mechanism, an object side bracket provided with a tapered hole on an outer side is attached to a proximal end of the object, and
the arm mechanism grips the connector-side bracket by the arm-side bracket and grips the object by inserting the tapered pin into the tapered hole (abstract, disclosing controller is used to control the positioning of the frame via the robots and end effector by executing method instructions to cause the robots to align the locator pins of the end effectors with the openings of the frame, and to insert the aligned locator pins into the openings toward the center axis from outside of the vehicle frame. The robots lift the frame from a first conveyor, with weight of the vehicle frame born by the locator pins during the lift. [0023] and figures 2-3, disclosing locator pins and holes 40 are tapered).
Bacalia and Sato are analogous arts as they are in same field of endeavor. Robotic end effectors. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of claimed invention to modify art of Sato to wherein an arm-side bracket openable and closable and provided with a tapered pin on an inner side is attached to a distal end of the arm mechanism, a connector-side bracket provided with a tapered hole on an outer side is attached to a proximal end of the charging connector, and the arm mechanism grips the connector-side bracket by the arm-side bracket and grips the charging connector by inserting the tapered pin into the tapered hole as taught by Bacalia to effectively align the arm mechanism to charging connector and bear its weight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hetrich (US 20240051416) teaches of a robotic arm to move charging equipment. See abstract and figures 1-4.
Lauer (US 20250018813) teaches of end effector for automated electric vehicle charger. See abstract.
Lee (US 12337711) teaches of electric vehicle charger. See abstract.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARSLAN AZHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-1703. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30 - 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, Wade Miles can be reached at (571) 270-7777. 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.
/ARSLAN AZHAR/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights