[BC] Franklin Antenna - KTTO (ex-KREM)]

[Peter]

On Sep 13, 2008, at 5:05 AM, RichardBJohnson at comcast.net wrote:

> Suppose I invented a method of charging one of those
> new electric cars that everybody is promising. You just
> drive it home and park it in your driveway or garage.
> You don't have to plug it in. Would you deny a patent
> because it used a transformer --and transformers
> are prior art?

You would patent a power-transforming device intended specifically  
for recharging the battery of a vehicle (could be an automobile,  
could be a fork lift truck, etcetera).

That it uses Tesla's inventive device as part of this new inventive  
device is not an issue as you are not seeking to patent "prior art",  
just utilizing it in a new and unique way.

I could see this device as having a plumb hanging from the ceiling of  
a garage or carport, or other stationary structure, and getting the  
plumb right on the target of the windshield, or other targeting  
member, would guarantee that, say, a floor-mounted transmitter (one  
part of the transformer) was optimally positioned with respect to the  
vehicle-mounted receiver (the other part of the transformer).

I could also see this device having a sensitive "trigger" within the  
plumb, this "trigger" effecting the proximity of the floor-mounted  
transmitter to the vehicle-mounted receiver, bringing the two parts  
into intimate contact, for the most efficient transfer of charging  
energy.