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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Burrussi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12603513. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Independent claim 1 of the instant application and independent claim 1 of the ‘513 patent both recite: “A portable power case comprising a housing; a printed circuit board (PCB); a separating barrier between two battery packs; a portable power case comprising: a housing; a printed circuit board (PCB); at least two battery packs connected to the PCB; and wherein the portable power case is operable to provide power to at least one power consuming device; wherein the portable power case includes at least one connector for at least one lead; wherein the at least one lead includes a cable portion, wherein a spring is provided around the cable portion, and wherein the cable portion and the flexible spring are held in a lid of the portable power case.” Dependent claims 2-8 are identical for the instant application and the ‘513 patent. Therefore, the ‘513 patent is seen to be anticipatory to the instant application.
Independent claim 9 of the instant application and independent claim 9 of the ‘513 patent both recite: “A system for providing power to at least one power consuming device, comprising: a portable power case; a bag; and the at least one power consuming device; wherein the portable power case includes a housing, a printed circuit board (PCB), at least two battery packs connected to the PCB; wherein the portable power case includes at least one connector for at least one lead; wherein the at least one lead includes a cable portion, wherein a flexible spring is provided around the cable portion, and wherein the cable portion and the flexible spring are held in a lid of the portable power case; wherein the flexible spring is configured to allow the at least one lead to bend omnidirectionally without breaking; wherein the bag is operable to close, wherein the at least one power consuming device is outside of the bag, wherein the at least one lead is operable to charge the at least one power consuming device when the bag is closed; and wherein the portable power case is operable to provide power to the at least one power consuming device.” Dependent claims 10-14 are identical for the instant application and the ‘513 patent. Therefore, the ‘513 patent is seen to be anticipatory to the instant application.
Independent claim 15 of the instant application and independent claim 15 of the ‘513 patent both recite: “A portable power case comprising: a housing; a printed circuit board (PCB); and at least two battery packs connected to the PCB; wherein the portable power case includes at least one connector for at least one lead; wherein the at least one lead includes a cable portion, wherein a flexible spring is provided around the cable portion, and wherein the cable portion and the flexible spring are held in a lid of the portable power case; and wherein the flexible spring is configured to allow the at least one lead to bend omnidirectionally without breaking.” Dependent claims 16-20 are identical for the instant application and the ‘513 patent. Therefore, the ‘513 patent is seen to be anticipatory to the instant application.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12407175. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Independent claim 1 of the instant application and independent claim 1 of the ‘513 patent both recite: “A portable power case comprising a housing; a printed circuit board (PCB); a separating barrier between two battery packs; a portable power case comprising: a housing; a printed circuit board (PCB); at least two battery packs connected to the PCB; and wherein the portable power case is operable to provide power to at least one power consuming device; wherein the portable power case includes at least one connector for at least one lead; wherein the at least one lead includes a cable portion, wherein a spring is provided around the cable portion, and wherein the cable portion and the flexible spring are held in a lid of the portable power case.” Dependent claims 2-8 are identical for the instant application and the ‘175 patent. Therefore, the ‘175 patent is seen to be anticipatory to the instant application.
Independent claim 9 of the instant application and independent claim 9 of the ‘513 patent both recite: “A system for providing power to at least one power consuming device, comprising: a portable power case; a bag; and the at least one power consuming device; wherein the portable power case includes a housing, a printed circuit board (PCB), at least two battery packs connected to the PCB; wherein the portable power case includes at least one connector for at least one lead; wherein the at least one lead includes a cable portion, wherein a flexible spring is provided around the cable portion, and wherein the cable portion and the flexible spring are held in a lid of the portable power case; wherein the flexible spring is configured to allow the at least one lead to bend omnidirectionally without breaking; wherein the bag is operable to close, wherein the at least one power consuming device is outside of the bag, wherein the at least one lead is operable to charge the at least one power consuming device when the bag is closed; and wherein the portable power case is operable to provide power to the at least one power consuming device.” Dependent claims 10-14 are identical for the instant application and the ‘175 patent. Therefore, the ‘175 patent is seen to be anticipatory to the instant application.
Independent claim 15 of the instant application and independent claim 15 of the ‘513 patent both recite: “A portable power case comprising: a housing; a printed circuit board (PCB); and at least two battery packs connected to the PCB; wherein the portable power case includes at least one connector for at least one lead; wherein the at least one lead includes a cable portion, wherein a flexible spring is provided around the cable portion, and wherein the cable portion and the flexible spring are held in a lid of the portable power case; and wherein the flexible spring is configured to allow the at least one lead to bend omnidirectionally without breaking.” Dependent claims 16-20 are identical for the instant application and the ‘175 patent. Therefore, the ‘175 patent is seen to be anticipatory to the instant application.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gissin et al. US 20170110896 in view of Burruss, Jr. US 4303083.
Regarding claims 1 and 15 [claim 1 is considered representative for purposes of itemization], Gissin discloses a portable power case [e.g., Fig. 7 (see reproduced below) portable case 700] comprising:
a housing [par. 0060 portable and durable case];
a printed circuit board (PCB) [Fig. 9, battery printed circuit board (BPCB) 920];
at least two battery packs [Fig. 9, battery packs 910] connected to the PCB [pars. 0021, 0022, 0101, 0102, 0108]; and
the portable power case is operable to provide power to at least one power consuming device [pars. 0031, 0032];
wherein the portable power case [portable case 700] includes at least one connector for at least one lead [iaw applicant’s specification this limitation is interpreted as “at least one lead connector”; see Fig. 47 (lead connector 3716). Gissin discloses 12V ports and USB ports at par. 0080 for connecting leads. Fig. 7 shows a lead/cable for supplying power to smartphone 720, par. 0089];
and wherein the at least one lead includes a cable portion [Fig. 7 shows a lead/cable for supplying power to smartphone 720, par. 0089],
PNG
media_image1.png
424
612
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gissin does not disclose: a spring is provided around the cable portion, and wherein the spring is held by the portable power case; and wherein the flexible spring is configured to allow the at least one lead to bend omnidirectionally without breaking.
Burruss discloses: a spring [Fig. 1, spring 22] is provided around the cable portion [electrical power leads 10], and wherein the cable portion and the spring are held by the portable power case [equivalently device 10; col. 4 lines 1-9]; and wherein the flexible spring is configured to allow the at least one lead to bend omnidirectionally without breaking [col. 5 lines 2-9].
Gissin and Burruss are analogous devices with attached power cables for supplying and/or receiving power. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing to utilize Burruss’ strain-relief with Gissin’s portable power case and cable (as seen at 700, Fig. 7) for the intrinsic benefit of preventing damage to the cable if it is pulled too far in a perpendicular direction.
Regarding claims 2, 16, the combination of Gissin and Burruss disclose the portable power case, but is silent on: wherein the portable power case weighs approximately 6 pounds.
The combination of Gissin and Burruss disclose the claimed invention expect for the weight of approximately 6 lbs. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to design for an approximate 6 lb. weight since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, see In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); and that routine optimization of a portable case such as Gissin’s portable case would readily yield a design weight within the average user’s carrying limits, such as approximately 6 lbs. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 (2007).
Regarding claims 3, 17, the combination of Gissin and Burruss disclose wherein the portable power case is approximately 13 inches Burruss or less than approximately 13 inches Burruss [Gissin, par. 0061], but is silent on: wherein the portable power case is approximately 3.6 inches in diameter or less than approximately 3.6 inches in diameter.
Examiner takes Official Notice, IAW MPEP 2144.03, as to the common knowledge of the recited subject matter.
Utilizing shapes having a diameter (e.g. a cylinder) is well-known in the art of battery supplies. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a shape having a diameter as recited for Gissin’s form-factor for the benefit of providing a case having an easy-to-carry shape for ease of portability and conformance to existing cylindrical batteries.
The combination of Gissin and Burruss disclose the claimed invention expect for case being approximately 3.6 inches in diameter. It would have been obvious matter of design choice to arrive at 3.6 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of Gissin’s power case. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claims 4, 18, the combination of Gissin and Burruss disclose further comprising at least one bumper, protrusion, and/or other internal stability member [Fig. 9, connectors 925 #1-#6 stabilize and connect each battery pack to the BPCB] between each battery pack of the at least two battery packs and the PCB [par. 0108].
Regarding claim 5, combination of Gissin and Burruss disclose wherein the at least two battery packs are encased [Gissin, Fortified plastic shell, pars. 0101-0107], but is silent on: in at least one layer of heat barrier material.
Examiner takes Official Notice, IAW MPEP 2144.03, as to the common knowledge of the recited subject matter.
Encasing batteries in a layer of heat barrier material is well-known in the art of battery supplies. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to encase Gissin’s batteries with a layer of heat barrier material for the benefit of providing protecting the batteries from potentially absorbing heat from the environment.
Regarding claims 6, 19, the combination of Gissin and Burruss disclose wherein the housing includes at least one flat side [e.g., Fig. 7, the bottom side of case 700].
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Gissin and Burruss disclose the portable power case of claim 1, but is silent on: wherein the portable power case is formed by at least two chemically welded corresponding sides.
Examiner takes Official Notice, IAW MPEP 2144.03, as to the common knowledge of the recited subject matter.
Chemical welding is well-known in the art of cases for battery supplies. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize chemical welding to construct Gissin’s portable power case for the benefit of utilizing an industry standard means of fabrication that is both cost-effective and conducive to manufacturing.
Claim(s) 8, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gissin et al. US 20170110896 in view of Burruss, Jr. US 4303083 as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Luo US 20210032008.
Regarding claims 8, 20, the combination of Gissin and Burruss disclose the portable power case, wherein the portable power case is configured to fit within a bag [par. 0061 the portable case may have dimensions of 15.5″×15.5″×6″, and thus would fit any large commercially available bags], but is silent on: wherein the bag is formed from a heat-barrier material.
Luo discloses wherein the bag is formed from a heat-barrier material [pars. 0001, 0075, insulation material, par. 0079, see also abstract].
Gissin, Burruss and Luo are analogous articles of manufacture. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing to utilize Luo’s thermal bag to carry Gissin’s portable power case for the benefit of being able to simultaneously carry items requiring cooling, e.g. by ice per Luo’s par. 0017, as well as any other article needed to be carried, such as Gissin’s smartphone 720 in the same bag while keeping the items segregated [Luo, par. 0079].
Claim(s) 9-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gissin et al. US 20170110896 in view of Burruss, Jr. US 4303083 and further in view of Luo US 20210032008.
Regarding claim 9, Gissin discloses a system for providing power to at least one power consuming device, comprising:
a portable power case [e.g., Fig. 7 (see reproduced above) portable case 700];
at least one power consuming device [pars. 0031, 0032];
wherein the portable power case includes a housing [par. 0060 portable and durable case], a printed circuit board (PCB) [Fig. 9, battery printed circuit board (BPCB) 920]; and
at least two battery packs [Fig. 9, battery packs 910] connected to the PCB [pars. 0021, 0022, 0101, 0102, 0108];
wherein the portable power case [portable case 700] includes at least one connector for at least one lead [iaw applicant’s specification, this limitation is interpreted as “at least one lead connector”; see Fig. 47 (lead connector 3716). Gissin discloses 12V ports and USB ports at par. 0080 for connecting leads. Fig. 7 shows a lead/cable for supplying power to smartphone 720, par. 0089];
wherein the at least one lead includes a cable portion [Fig. 7 shows a lead/cable for supplying power to smartphone 720, par. 0089],
Gissin does not disclose: a spring is provided around the cable portion, and wherein the spring is held by the portable power case; wherein the flexible spring is configured to allow the at least one lead to bend omnidirectionally without breaking; and a bag that is operable to close, wherein the at least one power consuming device is outside of the bag, wherein the at least one lead is operable to charge the at least one power consuming device when the bag is closed.
Burruss discloses: a spring [Fig. 1, spring 22] is provided around the cable portion [electrical power leads 10], and wherein the cable portion and the spring are held by the portable power case [equivalently device 10; col. 4 lines 1-9]; and wherein the flexible spring is configured to allow the at least one lead to bend omnidirectionally without breaking [col. 5 lines 2-9].
Gissin and Burruss are analogous devices with attached power cables for supplying and/or receiving power. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing to utilize Burruss’ strain-relief with Gissin’s portable power case and cable (as seen at 700, Fig. 7) for the intrinsic benefit of preventing damage to the cable if it is pulled too far in a perpendicular direction.
The combination of Gissin and Burruss do not disclose: a bag that is operable to close, wherein the at least one power consuming device is outside of the bag, wherein the at least one lead is operable to charge the at least one power consuming device when the bag is closed.
Luo discloses a bag that is operable to close [Fig. 4, outer bag 4], wherein the at least one power consuming device is outside of the bag [Par. 0079. Note that items may be inside or outside of the bag as desired], wherein the at least one lead is operable to charge the at least one power consuming device [seen in Fig. 7 of Gissin, the lead/cable is used for supplying power to smartphone 720 from the portable case 700] when the bag is closed [pars. 0002, 0079 the bag may be opened, closed, or partially closed via zippers].
Gissin, Burruss and Luo are analogous articles of manufacture. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing to utilize Luo’s thermal bag to carry (as desired), the combination of Gissin’s and Burruss’ portable power case for the benefit of being able to simultaneously carry items requiring cooling, e.g. by ice per Luo’s par. 0017, as well as any other article needed to be carried, such as Gissin’s smartphone 720 in the same bag while keeping the items segregated [Luo, par. 0079].
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Gissin, Burruss and Luo disclose the portable power case of claim 9, but is silent on: wherein the portable power case weighs approximately 6 pounds.
The combination of Gissin, Burruss and Luo disclose the claimed invention expect for the weight of approximately 6 lbs. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to design for an approximate 6 lb. weight since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art, see In re Boesch, 617 F. 2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); and that routine optimization of a portable case such as Gissin’s portable case would readily yield a design weight within the average user’s carrying limits, such as approximately 6 lbs. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 (2007).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Gissin, Burruss and Luo disclose wherein the portable power case is approximately 13 inches Burruss or less than approximately 13 inches Burruss [Gissin, par. 0061], but is silent on: wherein the portable power case is approximately 3.6 inches in diameter or less than approximately 3.6 inches in diameter.
Examiner takes Official Notice, IAW MPEP 2144.03, as to the common knowledge of the recited subject matter.
Utilizing shapes having a diameter (e.g. a cylinder) is well-known in the art of battery supplies. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a shape having a diameter as recited for Gissin’s form-factor for the benefit of providing a case having an easy-to-carry shape for ease of portability and conformance to existing cylindrical batteries.
The combination of Gissin, Burruss and Luo disclose the claimed invention expect for case being approximately 3.6 inches in diameter. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to arrive at 3.6 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of Gissin’s power case. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 12, combination of Gissin, Burruss and Luo disclose further comprising at least one bumper, protrusion, and/or other internal stability member [Gissin, Fig. 9, connectors 925 #1-#6 stabilize and connect each battery pack to the BPCB] between each battery pack of the at least two battery packs and the PCB [par. 0108].
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Gissin, Burruss and Luo disclose wherein the housing includes at least one flat side [e.g., Fig. 7, the bottom side of case 700].
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Gissin, Burruss and Luo disclose the portable power case of claims 1 and 9 respectively, but is silent on: wherein the portable power case is formed by at least two chemically welded corresponding sides.
Examiner takes Official Notice, IAW MPEP 2144.03, as to the common knowledge of the recited subject matter.
Chemical welding is well-known in the art of cases for battery supplies. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize chemical welding to construct Gissin’s portable power case for the benefit of utilizing an industry standard means of fabrication that is both cost-effective and conducive to manufacturing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, “Burruss may disclose a spring positioned around an electrical lead; however, Burruss only teaches a spring that is external to the device housing. In Burruss, the spring (22) is shown and described as surrounding the electrical lead outside of the device and functioning as an external protective or strain-relief component (see Fig. 1). Burruss further confirms this external configuration, stating that the spring is "coiled around the wire for an extent of about an inch from the outer surface of the main structural body" (col. 5, lines 7-9). This emphasizes that the spring begins at, and extends outward from, the exterior of the device, and does not extend into the housing.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The limitation (claims 1, 9 and 15) recites, “… the cable portion and the flexible spring are held in a lid of the portable power case …”. Burrus discloses a spring 22 wrapped around a wire 10. The wire 10 passes through the body 2 of the device housing [col. 4 lines 46-51] and the spring 22 wraps around the wire 10 to protect the wire 10 from strain [col. 5 lines 7-9]; thus spring 22 must be held in the body 2 in order to perform its strain relief function. Figs. 1 illustrates spring 10 is embedded in the body 2 housing:
PNG
media_image2.png
288
548
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 similarly illustrates spring 10 is embedded in the body 2 housing, and is therefore “held” as recited in the limitation above.
PNG
media_image3.png
336
278
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Applicant argues on page 9, “Luo does not suggest a configuration in which the bag remains closed while permitting a cable or lead to extend outside the bag for power transmission.”
Examiner respectfully notes that this limitation does not appear in any claim. Claim 9 specifically does not require the portable power case to be inside the bag. Therefore, any argument that hinges upon the lead (attached to the portable power case) not being able to be extended out of the bag for charging a device is moot. The lead (i.e. see Gissin Fig. 7, the lead/cable for supplying power to smartphone 720) would be operable for charging the device when the portable power case is outside of the bag (“when the bag is closed”, as recited).
To the extent that ordinary skill may find it convenient, and as noted in the rejection above, Luo’s thermal bag may be used to carry the combination of Gissin’s and Burruss’ portable power case for the benefit of being able to simultaneously carry items requiring cooling, e.g. by ice per Luo’s par. 0017, as well as any other article needed to be carried, such as Gissin’s smartphone 720 in the same bag while keeping the items segregated [Luo, par. 0079].
Any instances of common knowledge or “well-known in the art” statements are taken to be admitted prior art because applicant either failed to traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice or the traversal was inadequate. See Ahlert, 424 F.2d at 1091, 165 USPQ at 420.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 9680318 discloses an energy share pack comprising a housing, at least one energy storage component within the housing, at least one energy conversion component within the housing, and a connection point for connecting to more than one of energy users, energy sources and other energy share packs simultaneously for sharing energy. The energy share pack may have an energy generation component for generating harvestable energy, and two or more ports of any combination of the following types: bidirectional power port, bidirectional USB port, unidirectional output power port, and unidirectional input power port. The share pack ports may operate simultaneously at different voltage levels, and at least one port may be bi-directional. Furthermore, the share packs may have an integrated display for providing information on the energy share pack in which the display is integrated and information about other energy share packs connected thereto.
US 7712645 a chest bag apparatus is arranged to be worn and carried in position secured against the chest of a wearer both in a first, closed, carrying condition and in a second, open, substantially L-shaped, tray-like condition providing facilitated access to the interior of the bag and its contents during its use while being worn by a wearer. The chest bag may further have a second, fully open condition for use of the chest bag in a hanging condition on a support hook or in condition laid out on an underlying ground surface. The chest bag preferably includes a quick release, temporary closure arrangement to permit the bag to be quickly closed temporarily so that it does not obstruct the wearer's view and activity.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD V MURALIDAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8933. The examiner can normally be reached M - W 9:30 am to 6:30 PM.
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, Drew Dunn can be contacted at 571-272-2312. 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.
RICHARD V. MURALIDAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/RICHARD V MURALIDAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights