UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/549,115
`
`08/04/2017
`
`ATSUSHI IISAKA
`
`731156.638USPC
`
`1066
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panason1e
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`ROBBINS” JERRY D
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2859
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`07/25/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`US PTOeACtion @ SeedIP .Com
`
`pairlinkdktg @ seedip .eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0/7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/549,115
`Examiner
`JERRY D ROBBINS
`
`Applicant(s)
`IISAKA et al.
`Art Unit
`2859
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on August 4, 2017.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`1—10 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabte. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 8/4/17 is/are: a)[:] accepted or b). objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)D Some**
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date W.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190524
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/549,115
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA 0r 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.
`
`Status of Preliminary Amendment
`
`Examiner acknowledges receipt of preliminary amendment to application 15/549,115
`
`received August 4, 2017. Claims 1 and 3 are amended, claims 2 and 4—7 are left as original, and
`
`claims 8—10 are newly added.
`
`Drawings
`
`The drawings are objected to because Step ST16 in both Figs. 2 and 3 state “Start
`
`Charging ...”; but paragraph [0064] when describing Step ST16 states “stops the charging
`
`operation”. Same problem with Fig. 4, Step ST47; reference paragraph [0091].
`
`Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to
`
`the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing
`
`sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet,
`
`even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing
`
`should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure
`
`must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must
`
`be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the
`
`drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the
`
`renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an
`
`application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet”
`
`pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: l5/549,l 15
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 3
`
`be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The
`
`objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 US C § 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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitsutani
`
`U.S. PGPub 2011/0285350 A1 (hereinafter Mitsutani) in View of Phadke et al. US. Patent
`
`7,719,808 B2 (hereinafter Phadke).
`
`Regarding Claim 1, Mitsutani teaches a power conversion device (Mitsutani, Figs. 3 and
`
`4, Element 42, “Charger”; Paras. [0054] — [0077]) for converting alternating current power
`
`(Mitsutani, Fig. 4, Element 402; Para. [0068], Lines l—4, “AC electric power”) into direct current
`
`power (Mitsutani, Fig. 4, Elements PL2 and NL2; Para. [0058], Lines 16—19, “DC power”) to
`
`supply the direct current power to a load (Mitsutani, Fig. 1, Element lO—2, “BAT”; Para. [0082],
`
`Lines l—2. Although power is supplied to charge three separate batteries, lO—l,
`
`lO—2 and lO—3,
`
`i.e. three separate loads, in this case the rejection is mainly directed to the charging operation of
`
`load/battery lO—2.).
`
`Further, Mitsutani teaches the power conversion device comprising an input current
`
`sensor (Mitsutani, Fig. 3, Element 92; Para. [0055], Line 3) that detects an input current value of
`
`the alternating current power (Mitsutani, Para. [0059], Lines 3—5), an input voltage sensor
`
`(Mitsutani, Fig. 3, Element 91; Para. [0055], Lines 2—3) that detects an input voltage value of the
`
`alternating current power (Mitsutani, Para. [0059], Lines l—2), a power converter (Mitsutani, Fig.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/549,115
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 4
`
`3, Element 80; Para. [0055], Line 2) that converts the input alternating current power into the
`
`direct current powers (Mitsutani, Para. [0057], Lines 6—9, and Para. [0058], Lines 16—19), an
`
`output current sensor (Mitsutani, Fig. 3, Element 95; Para. [0055], Line 3) that detects an output
`
`current value from the power converter (Mitsutani, Para. [0059], Lines 10—12), an output voltage
`
`sensor (Mitsutani, Fig. 3, Element 94; Para. [0055], Lines 2—3) that detects an output voltage
`
`value from the power converter (Mitsutani, Para. [0059], Lines 8—10).
`
`Mitsutani also teaches a controller (Mitsutani, Figs. 1 and 4, Element 46, “Charging
`
`ECU”, Para. [0040], Lines 1—10) that obtains an allowable current value of the alternating current
`
`power that can be accepted (Mitsutani, Para. [0073], Lines 1—9), and controls the power converter
`
`(Mitsutani, Figs. 1, 3 and 4, Element 42, “Charger”) so that the input current value does not
`
`exceed the allowable current value, based on the input current value detected by the input current
`
`sensor (Mitsutani, Fig. 3; Element 92; Para. [0060], Lines 1—7, and Para. [0077], Lines 1—5,
`
`“outputs command signal CHPW” to microcomputer Element 88 of charger Element 42).
`
`Finally, Mitsutani teaches wherein the controller detects an abnormality in the power
`
`conversion device (Mitsutani, Fig. 8; Steps S6 or S7 2 YES; Para. [0105], Lines 1—6) based on
`
`the input current value, the input voltage value, the output current value, the output voltage
`
`value, and power conversion efficiency of the power converter (Mitsutani, Fig. 8, Steps S6 or S7;
`
`Paras. [0103] and [0104]. Where comparing predetermined thresholds 0t and B are indicative of
`
`the power conversion efficiency of the power converter, and as explained in the disclosure
`
`calculations to control the converter are based on input/output current/voltage detections.).
`
`Although Mitsutani suggests the abnormality is based on input/output current/voltage
`
`detections and some type of efficiency determination of the conversion process, it does not
`
`explicitly teach detecting the abnormality based on efficiency of the power converter.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/549,115
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 5
`
`Phadke et al., however, teaches wherein the controller detects an abnormality in the
`
`power conversion device (Phadke, Fig. 5, Element 500; Col. 4, Lines 53—58, “efficiency
`
`degradation”) based on the input current value, the input voltage value, the output current value,
`
`the output voltage value, and power conversion efficiency of the power converter (Phadke, Col.
`
`4, Line 64 through Col. 5, Line 9).
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that
`
`although Mitsutani describes the process of adjusting the power converter based on input/output
`
`current/voltage to determine the most efficient conversion process to minimize charging time
`
`while assuring safety in the charging process, Mitsutani would inherently incorporate some type
`
`of conventional efficiency processing commonly understood in the art. The efficiency
`
`processing and fault reporting taught by Phadke, for controlling the power converter, teaches one
`
`of the many conventional power converter circuits utilized in the art for charging the battery(ies)
`
`of an electric/hybrid vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
`
`choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one
`
`taught by Phadke, to control the power converter of Mitsutani.
`
`Regarding Claim 2, The combined teaching of references Mitsutani and Phadke
`
`discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1. Furthermore, Mitsutani teaches
`
`wherein the controller obtains the allowable current value based on a pilot signal supplied
`
`together with the alternating current power (Mitsutani, Fig. 4; Para. [0073], Lines 1—9, “pilot
`
`signal CPLT”).
`
`Regarding Claim 3, The combined teaching of references Mitsutani and Phadke
`
`discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1. Furthermore, Phadke teaches wherein
`
`the controller calculates the power conversion efficiency based on the input current value, the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/549,115
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 6
`
`input voltage value, the output current value, and the output voltage value to detect the
`
`abnormality by using predetermined power conversion efficiency (Phadke, Col. 4, Line 64
`
`through Col. 5, Line 9) and the calculated power conversion efficiency (Phadke, Col. 5, Lines
`
`17-24).
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that
`
`although Mitsutani describes the process of adjusting the power converter based on input/output
`
`current/voltage to determine the most efficient conversion process to minimize charging time
`
`while assuring safety in the charging process, Mitsutani would inherently incorporate some type
`
`of conventional efficiency processing commonly understood in the art. The efficiency
`
`processing and fault reporting taught by Phadke, for controlling the power converter, teaches one
`
`of the many conventional power converter circuits utilized in the art for charging the battery(ies)
`
`of an electric/hybrid vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
`
`choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one
`
`taught by Phadke, to control the power converter of Mitsutani.
`
`Regarding Claim 4, The combined teaching of references Mitsutani and Phadke
`
`discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1. Furthermore, Mitsutani teaches
`
`wherein when the controller detects the abnormality in the power conversion device, the
`
`controller controls the power converter to stop supplying of power to the load or to lower power
`
`supplied to the load (Mitsutani, Para. [0043], Lines 1—9, and Para. [0044], Lines 4—7).
`
`Regarding Claim 5, The combined teaching of references Mitsutani and Phadke
`
`discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1. Furthermore, Mitsutani teaches
`
`wherein when the controller detects the abnormality in the power conversion device, the
`
`controller controls the power converter to supply power to the load at a minimum allowable
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: l5/549,l 15
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 7
`
`current value or below (Mitsutani, Fig. 5, Control Signal CHPW; Para. [0080], Lines 6—14,
`
`“limited”, and Para. [0095], Lines 2—4. Mitsutani addresses this type of lowering the charging
`
`current as a normal operation and does not refer to it as detecting an abnormality as labeled in the
`
`claimed invention. Mitsutani uses signal CHPW to adjust or raise/lower the charging current
`
`based on the need determination, but uses signal CHRQ to turn off the converter when a true
`
`abnormality is detected).
`
`Regarding Claim 6, The combined teaching of references Mitsutani and Phadke
`
`discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claims 3/1. Furthermore, Mitsutani teaches the
`
`controller controls the power converter to stop supplying of power to the load or to lower power
`
`supplied to the load (Mitsutani, Fig. 5, Control Signal CHPW; Para. [0080], Lines 6—14,
`
`“limited”, and Para. [0095], Lines 2—4. Mitsutani uses signal CHPW to adjust or raise/lower the
`
`charging current based on the need determination, but uses signal CHRQ to turn off the converter
`
`when a true abnormality is detected), the controller controls the power converter to supply
`
`greater power to the load than power supplied when the calculated power conversion efficiency
`
`is greater than the predetermined power conversion efficiency (Mitsutani, Fig. 5, Control Signal
`
`CHPW; Para. [0080], Lines l—6. Mitsutani uses signal CHPW to adjust or raise/lower the
`
`charging current based on the need determination), but does not explicitly teach comparing
`
`different power conversion efficiencies which are determined or looked up.
`
`Phadke, however, teaches wherein when the calculated power conversion efficiency is
`
`greater than the predetermined power conversion efficiency, and when the calculated power
`
`conversion efficiency is smaller than the predetermined power conversion efficiency (Phadke,
`
`Col. 4, Line 64 through Col. 5, Line 9, and Col. 5, Lines 17—24).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/549,115
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 8
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that
`
`although Mitsutani describes the process of adjusting the power converter based on input/output
`
`current/voltage to determine the most efficient conversion process to minimize charging time
`
`while assuring safety in the charging process, Mitsutani would inherently incorporate some type
`
`of conventional efficiency processing commonly understood in the art. The efficiency
`
`processing and fault reporting taught by Phadke, for controlling the power converter, teaches one
`
`of the many conventional power converter circuits utilized in the art for charging the battery(ies)
`
`of an electric/hybrid vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
`
`choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one
`
`taught by Phadke, to control the power converter of Mitsutani.
`
`Regarding Claim 7, The combined teaching of references Mitsutani and Phadke
`
`discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claims 6/3/1. Furthermore, Mitsutani teaches
`
`the controller controls the power converter so that the input current value reduces as the
`
`calculated power conversion efficiency increases (Mitsutani, Fig. 5, Control Signal CHPW; Para.
`
`[0080], Lines l—6. Mitsutani uses signal CHPW to adjust or raise/lower the charging current
`
`based on the need determination.). , but does not explicitly teach comparing different power
`
`conversion efficiencies which are determined or looked up.
`
`Phadke, however, teaches wherein when the calculated power conversion efficiency is
`
`greater than the predetermined power conversion efficiency (Phadke, Col. 4, Line 64 through
`
`Col. 5, Line 9, and Col. 5, Lines 17—24).
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that
`
`although Mitsutani describes the process of adjusting the power converter based on input/output
`
`current/voltage to determine the most efficient conversion process to minimize charging time
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/549,115
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 9
`
`while assuring safety in the charging process, Mitsutani would inherently incorporate some type
`
`of conventional efficiency processing commonly understood in the art. The efficiency
`
`processing and fault reporting taught by Phadke, for controlling the power converter, teaches one
`
`of the many conventional power converter circuits utilized in the art for charging the battery(ies)
`
`of an electric/hybrid vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
`
`choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one
`
`taught by Phadke, to control the power converter of Mitsutani.
`
`Regarding Claim 8, The combined teaching of references Mitsutani and Phadke
`
`discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claims 2/1. Furthermore, Phadke teaches
`
`wherein the controller calculates the power conversion efficiency based on the input current
`
`value, the input voltage value, the output current value, and the output voltage value to detect the
`
`abnormality by using predetermined power conversion efficiency (Phadke, Col. 4, Line 64
`
`through Col. 5, Line 9) and the calculated power conversion efficiency (Phadke, Col. 5, Lines
`
`17-24).
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that
`
`although Mitsutani describes the process of adjusting the power converter based on input/output
`
`current/voltage to determine the most efficient conversion process to minimize charging time
`
`while assuring safety in the charging process, Mitsutani would inherently incorporate some type
`
`of conventional efficiency processing commonly understood in the art. The efficiency
`
`processing and fault reporting taught by Phadke, for controlling the power converter, teaches one
`
`of the many conventional power converter circuits utilized in the art for charging the battery(ies)
`
`of an electric/hybrid vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: l5/549,l 15
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 10
`
`choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one
`
`taught by Phadke, to control the power converter of Mitsutani.
`
`Regarding Claim 9, The combined teaching of references Mitsutani and Phadke
`
`discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claims 8/2/l. Furthermore, Mitsutani teaches
`
`the controller controls the power converter to stop supplying of power to the load or to lower
`
`power supplied to the load (Mitsutani, Fig. 5, Control Signal CHPW; Para. [0080], Lines 6—14,
`
`“limited”, and Para. [0095], Lines 2—4. Mitsutani uses signal CHPW to adjust or raise/lower the
`
`charging current based on the need determination, but uses signal CHRQ to turn off the converter
`
`when a true abnormality is detected.), the controller controls the power converter to supply
`
`greater power to the load than power supplied when the calculated power conversion efficiency
`
`is greater than the predetermined power conversion efficiency (Mitsutani, Fig. 5, Control Signal
`
`CHPW; Para. [0080], Lines l—6. Mitsutani uses signal CHPW to adjust or raise/lower the
`
`charging current based on the need determination), but does not explicitly teach comparing
`
`different power conversion efficiencies which are determined or looked up.
`
`Phadke, however, teaches wherein when the calculated power conversion efficiency is
`
`greater than the predetermined power conversion efficiency, and when the calculated power
`
`conversion efficiency is smaller than the predetermined power conversion efficiency (Phadke,
`
`Col. 4, Line 64 through Col. 5, Line 9, and Col. 5, Lines 17—24).
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that
`
`although Mitsutani describes the process of adjusting the power converter based on input/output
`
`current/voltage to determine the most efficient conversion process to minimize charging time
`
`while assuring safety in the charging process, Mitsutani would inherently incorporate some type
`
`of conventional efficiency processing commonly understood in the art. The efficiency
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/549,115
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page ll
`
`processing and fault reporting taught by Phadke, for controlling the power converter, teaches one
`
`of the many conventional power converter circuits utilized in the art for charging the battery(ies)
`
`of an electric/hybrid vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
`
`choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one
`
`taught by Phadke, to control the power converter of Mitsutani.
`
`Regarding Claim 10, The combined teaching of references Mitsutani and Phadke
`
`discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claims 9/8/2/1. Furthermore, Mitsutani
`
`teaches the controller controls the power converter so that the input current value reduces as the
`
`calculated power conversion efficiency increases (Mitsutani, Fig. 5, Control Signal CHPW; Para.
`
`[0080], Lines l—6. Mitsutani uses signal CHPW to adjust or raise/lower the charging current
`
`based on the need determination.). , but does not explicitly teach comparing different power
`
`conversion efficiencies which are determined or looked up.
`
`Phadke, however, teaches wherein when the calculated power conversion efficiency is
`
`greater than the predetermined power conversion efficiency (Phadke, Col. 4, Line 64 through
`
`Col. 5, Line 9, and Col. 5, Lines 17—24).
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that
`
`although Mitsutani describes the process of adjusting the power converter based on input/output
`
`current/voltage to determine the most efficient conversion process to minimize charging time
`
`while assuring safety in the charging process, Mitsutani would inherently incorporate some type
`
`of conventional efficiency processing commonly understood in the art. The efficiency
`
`processing and fault reporting taught by Phadke, for controlling the power converter, teaches one
`
`of the many conventional power converter circuits utilized in the art for charging the battery(ies)
`
`of an electric/hybrid vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/549,115
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 12
`
`choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one
`
`taught by Phadke, to control the power converter of Mitsutani.
`
`Conclusion
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`disclosure.
`
`Mitsutani U.S. PGPub 2014/0239894 Al teaches an AC/DC charging device for a vehicle
`
`that connects and disconnects and specifies a level of power that an external power source can
`
`supply.
`
`Masuda U.S. PGPub 2013/0088198 Al teaches a vehicle electric charging system which
`
`controls the level of charging current based on chosen parameters.
`
`Oshida U.S. PGPub 2010/0295375 Al teaches an abnormality determination means in a
`
`vehicle power diagnosis device.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to JERRY D ROBBINS whose telephone number is (571)272—7585.
`
`The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30AM — 5:30PM M—F.
`
`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 A. Dunn can be reached on 571—272—23 12. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571—273—8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/549,115
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 13
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent
`
`Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications
`
`may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished
`
`applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR
`
`system, see http://pair—direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR
`
`system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866—217—9197 (toll—free). If you would
`
`like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated
`
`information system, call 800—786—9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571—272—1000.
`
`/JERRY D ROBBINS/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 2859
`
`