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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claim limitation “the respective plurality of passive components for a first constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters is different than the respective plurality of passive components for a second constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters” is not disclosed by the spec
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2)as being anticipated by Pries et al (US 2022/0085652).
Re Claim 1; Pries disclose a device for wireless power transfer, the device comprising: a segmented coil comprising a plurality of resonant coil segments, (The polyphase inductive transmitter transfers power to a receiver; ¶¶[0075]–[0079].
Figure 10A and ¶[0108] identify phase coils La,Lb,Lc, each with series resonant capacitance. The coils form the claimed segments under the broadest reasonable reading of “segmented coil.”)
each adjacent pair of resonant coil segments of the plurality of resonant coil segments being separated from one another by a respective passive element (the capacitors), the plurality of resonant coil segments being arranged in a loop; (Fig. 10a Figure 10A depicts the closed delta path with La,Lb,Lc and intervening Ca,Cb,Cc. Each capacitor is a passive element. Pries also describes the phase windings’ circumferential placement; ¶[0084].)
a plurality of constituent converters coupled to the segmented coil, each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters being coupled to a respective resonant coil segment of the plurality of resonant coil segments, each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters being configured to drive the respective resonant coil segment; (Pries identifies the switching pairs S1/S2, S3/S4, and S5/S6 for phases a, b, and c; ¶¶[0080], [0136]. Each pair acts as a DC-to-AC phase switching stage coupled to and driving its associated resonant phase branch.) and
a processor configured to generate switch control signals for each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters; (Controller 20 can be a microcontroller, CPU, or FPGA and controls the switching pairs; ¶[0083].)
wherein the switch control signals for a first constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters are configured differently relative to the switch control signals for a second constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters to spatially shape the wireless power transfer.( Pries offsets the switching times of the phase pairs and changes switching-state durations in response to receiver translation. Those changes alter where the magnetic flux is concentrated; ¶¶[0094]–[0106], [0139], [0167] and Figures 6A–9B.)
Re Claim 2; Pries disclose wherein the switch control signals for the first constituent converter are phase-shifted relative to the switch control signals for the second constituent converter. (Pries further describes switching-time offsets between its phase pairs, including quadrature phase shifts and other usable shifts; ¶[0167] and Figure 20.)
Re Claim 3; Pries disclose wherein the switch control signals for the first constituent converter have a different duty cycle than the switch control signals for the second constituent converter. (Fig. 20 Par 0160 The relative timing of the switching may be adjusted to control the duty cycle. The closer of the relative switching timing reduces the duty cycle. The duty cycle and phase shift are mathematically and functionally related)
Re Claim 4; Pries disclose wherein the switch controls for the first and second constituent converters are configured such that the first and second constituent converters are not operated synchronously. (Fig. 20)
Re Claim 7; Pries disclose wherein: each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters comprises a plurality of switches controlled by the switch control signals; and the plurality of switches of the first constituent converter have a different drain voltage than the plurality of switches of the second constituent converter. (Fig. 20 the drain voltage in an amplifier or transistor circuit can have a direct relationship with phase shift, primarily because a standard common-source transistor amplifier inherently introduces a 180-degree phase inversion between the input gate voltage and the output drain voltage. In a basic AC MOSFET or JFET amplifier, when the input voltage at the gate goes up, the drain current increases. This larger current creates a bigger voltage drop across the drain resistor, which causes the overall drain voltage to go down. This opposite movement creates a 180° phase shift between input and output.)
Re Claim 8; Pries disclose wherein :each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters comprises first and second switches controlled by the switch control signals; the switch control signals for each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters establishes a zero voltage duration during which the first switch and the second switch are both on; and the switch control signals for the first constituent converter establish that the zero voltage duration for the first constituent converter is different than the zero voltage duration for the second constituent converter.(Fig. 20)
Re Claim 9; Pries discloses wherein: each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters comprises a plurality of switches controlled by the switch control signals; and each switch of the plurality of switches is ground-referenced. (Fig. 19)
Re Claim 10; Pries discloses wherein: each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters comprises first and second switches controlled by the switch control signals; and the switch control signals for the first switch and the second switch are complementary. (PE 0083)
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.
Claim(s) 5, 6 and 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pries in view of Mao (US 20190089197)
Re Claim 5; Pries disclose adjustment of phase excitation in response to alignment; ¶¶[0139], [0167].
Pries does not disclose wherein the plurality of constituent converters are controlled such that the first constituent converter provides a different amount of power to the segmented coil than the second constituent converter.
Mao discloses Power control at transmitter-module level, including selectively disabling modules while others supply power and controlling module output.(Par 0046)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have the relative contribution of spatially displaced coils affects the field at a misaligned receiver. Independently reducing one stage’s contribution and increasing or retaining another’s is a predictable way to implement the alignment response Pries seeks. Mao’s selective-module and module-level controls provide the specific unequal-power operation.
Re Claim 6; Mao discloses wherein the first constituent converter has a different DC voltage source than the second constituent converter. (Par 0045, Fig. 3)
Re Claim 11. (New) A device for wireless power transfer, the device comprising: a segmented coil comprising a plurality of resonant coil segments, each adjacent pair of resonant coil segments of the plurality of resonant coil segments being separated from one another by a respective passive element, the plurality of resonant coil segments being arranged in a loop; and a plurality of constituent converters coupled to the segmented coil, each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters being coupled to a respective resonant coil segment of the plurality of resonant coil segments, each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters being configured to drive the respective resonant coil segment; wherein a first constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters is configured to provide a different amount of power to the segmented coil than a second constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters. (This claim is analogous to claim 1 and 5 and therefore the same rejection is applied)
Re Claim 12; Mao discloses wherein the first constituent converter has a different DC voltage source than the second constituent converter. (Par 0045, Fig. 3)
Re Claim 13; Pries discloses wherein: each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters comprises a plurality of switches controlled by the switch control signals; and the plurality of switches of the first constituent converter have a different drain voltage than the plurality of switches of the second constituent converter. (Fig. 20 the drain voltage in an amplifier or transistor circuit can have a direct relationship with phase shift, primarily because a standard common-source transistor amplifier inherently introduces a 180-degree phase inversion between the input gate voltage and the output drain voltage. In a basic AC MOSFET or JFET amplifier, when the input voltage at the gate goes up, the drain current increases. This larger current creates a bigger voltage drop across the drain resistor, which causes the overall drain voltage to go down. This opposite movement creates a 180° phase shift between input and output.)
Re Claim 14; Pries discloses further comprising a processor to generate switch control signals for each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters, wherein the switch control signals for the first constituent converter are configured differently relative to the second constituent converter. .( Pries offsets the switching times of the phase pairs and changes switching-state durations in response to receiver translation. Those changes alter where the magnetic flux is concentrated; ¶¶[0094]–[0106], [0139], [0167] and Figures 6A–9B.)
Re Claim 15; Pries disclose wherein the switch control signals for the first constituent converter are phase-shifted relative to the switch control signals for the second constituent converter. (Fig. 20)
Re Claim 16; Pries disclose wherein the switch control signals for the first constituent converter have a different duty cycle than the switch control signals for the second constituent converter. (Fig. 20 Par 0160 The relative timing of the switching may be adjusted to control the duty cycle. The closer of the relative switching timing reduces the duty cycle. The duty cycle and phase shift are mathematically and functionally related)
Re Claim 17; Pries disclose wherein the switch controls for the first and second constituent converters are configured such that the first and second constituent converters are not operated synchronously. (Fig. 20)
Claim(s) 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pries in view of Masquelier et al. (US 2018/0351415)
Re Claim 18; Pries disclose a device for wireless power transfer, the device comprising: a segmented coil comprising a plurality of resonant coil segments, each adjacent pair of resonant coil segments of the plurality of resonant coil segments being separated from one another by a respective passive element, the plurality of resonant coil segments being arranged in a loop; and a plurality of constituent converters coupled to the segmented coil, each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters being coupled to a respective resonant coil segment of the plurality of resonant coil segments, each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters being configured to drive the respective resonant coil segment; wherein :each constituent converter comprises a respective plurality of passive components coupled to the respective coil segment; (see the rejection of claim 1) and
Pries does not disclose the respective plurality of passive components for a first constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters is different than the respective plurality of passive components for a second constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters.
Masquelier discloses the power converters includes an adjustable tuning apparatus which comprises passive elements, such as a rectifier, low pass filter, etc. The adjustable passive elements for each converters is different than the respective plurality of passive components for a second constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters based on the load. That is the impedance matched my the passive elements is unique to the load/receiver present.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have Pries identifies unequal phase impedances. Providing phase-specific, differently configured passive output networks of Masquelier type would allow each driven branch to be matched or filtered for its own impedance at the chosen transfer frequency.
Re Claim 20; Pries disclose further comprising a processor to generate switch control signals for each constituent converter of the plurality of constituent converters, wherein the switch control signals for the first constituent converter are configured differently relative to the second constituent converter.( Pries offsets the switching times of the phase pairs and changes switching-state durations in response to receiver translation. Those changes alter where the magnetic flux is concentrated; ¶¶[0094]–[0106], [0139], [0167] and Figures 6A–9B.)
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pries in view of Masquelier et al. (US 2018/0351415) and further in view of Mao
Re Claim 19; Pries disclose adjustment of phase excitation in response to alignment; ¶¶[0139], [0167].
Pries does not disclose wherein the plurality of constituent converters are controlled such that the first constituent converter provides a different amount of power to the segmented coil than the second constituent converter.
Mao discloses Power control at transmitter-module level, including selectively disabling modules while others supply power and controlling module output.(Par 0046)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have the relative contribution of spatially displaced coils affects the field at a misaligned receiver. Independently reducing one stage’s contribution and increasing or retaining another’s is a predictable way to implement the alignment response Pries seeks. Mao’s selective-module and module-level controls provide the specific unequal-power operation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL KESSIE whose telephone number is (571)272-4449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pmEst.
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.
/DANIEL KESSIE/
09/24/2026
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
