www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/996,175
`
`08/18/2020
`
`Satoru MASAOKA
`
`AOYA.34PUSO1CON
`
`9701
`
`MARKD. SARALINO (PAN)
`RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP
`1621 EUCLID AVENUE
`ISTH FLOOR
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44115
`
`PIGGUSH, AARON C
`
`2859
`
`10/28/2021
`
`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):
`
`ipdocket @rennerotto.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-6 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)____is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible 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 PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)() The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s)filed on 8/18/20 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:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)¥) All
`1.4) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin 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 8/18/20,9/14/20.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20211022
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/996, 175
`MASAOKA, Satoru
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`AARON C PIGGUSH
`2859
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom 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, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 8/18/20.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) 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 Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/996,175
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the
`
`first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`2.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
`
`Claim Interpretation
`
`(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. — An element ina claim for a combination may be expressed as
`a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts
`in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material,
`or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
`
`An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a
`specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim
`shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the
`specification and equivalents thereof.
`
`3.
`
`The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using
`
`the plain meaning of the claim languagein light of the specification as it would be understood
`
`by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element
`
`(also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the
`
`specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
`
`As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection |, claim limitations that meet the following
`
`three-prongtest will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112,sixth
`
`paragraph:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/996,175
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 3
`
`(A)
`
`the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for
`
`“means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term
`
`having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
`
`(B)
`
`the term “means”or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional
`
`language,typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”)
`
`or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
`
`(C)
`
`the term “means”or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient
`
`structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
`
`Use of the word “means”(or “step”) in a claim with functional languagecreatesa
`
`rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C.
`
`112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is
`
`interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when
`
`the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited
`
`function.
`
`Absence of the word “means”(or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption
`
`that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35
`
`U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under
`
`35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation
`
`recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the
`
`recited function.
`
`Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means”(or “step”) are being
`
`interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/996,175
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 4
`
`otherwiseindicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do
`
`not use the word “means”(or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-
`
`AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`4.
`
`Claims 1-6 are objected to becauseof the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the
`
`phrases “controlling on/off of the charging circuit” and “the power controller set the charging
`
`circuit off”. These phrases appear to be grammatically incorrect. Appropriate correction is
`
`required.
`
`Claims 2-6 are directly or indirectly dependent upon claim 1 and therefore also contain
`
`the problematic language.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`5.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
`(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or moreclaims 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-AlA), second paragraph:
`The specification shall conclude with one or moreclaims particularly pointing out and distinctly
`claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`6.
`
`Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AlA), second
`
`paragraph,as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject
`
`matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AlA 35 U.S.C.
`
`112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/996,175
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 5
`
`yl,
`Claim 1 recites the terms “for inputting”,
`
`I id.
`“for detecting”,
`
`“for measuring”, “for
`
`consuming”, “for charging”, and “for controlling” in lines 2-11. These terms makeit unclear as
`
`to what is included or excluded in the claim limitations because it is unclear as to whether or
`
`not the limitations following those phrases are actually carried out, if they are listed as
`
`intended use,or if they are meant to be interpreted as a means for performing a specified
`
`function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof (such as an
`
`interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f)).
`
`If the claim limitations are meant to be included as
`
`actual structure where the actions are carried out by that structure, then the term “for” should
`
`be replaced.
`
`If the claims are meant to be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), then the
`
`applicant is asked to provide clarification on the record.
`
`Claims 2-6 are directly or indirectly dependent upon claim 1 and therefore also contain
`
`the problematic language. Please note that claim 5 also individually recites “for supplying”
`
`which makes it unclear as to what is included or excluded from the claim in the same manner as
`
`claim 1 noted above, and that claim 6 is dependent upon claim 5 and therefore also contains
`
`the problematic language.
`
`Conclusion
`
`7.
`
`The prior art made of record and notrelied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`disclosure. Chen (US 2011/0095728) discloses a battery charger including the use of an
`
`external power source, rechargeable battery, and power enablement/disablementconditions.
`
`Kurayama (US 2013/0241496) discloses a power supply device which monitors anomalies and
`
`helps avoid battery damage due to overcharging/overdischarging.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/996,175
`Art Unit: 2859
`
`Page 6
`
`8.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to AARON C PIGGUSH whosetelephone number is (571)272-5978.
`
`The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00a.m. - 6:30p.m..
`
`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, Richard Isla can be reached on 571-272-5056. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization wherethis application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`/A.P./
`Examiner, Art Unit 2859
`
`/EDWARD TSO/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
`
`