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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9, 11, 14-17 and 28-37 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims 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-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 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-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 3, applicant should clarify if “at least one metal layer” in line 10 one of the “plurality of metal layers” as recite in line 2. For examination purpose, the limitation in question is interpreted as one of the first or second metal layers of the plurality of metal layers.
Claim 4 is rejected as being dependent on claim 3.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 6, 7, 11, 14, 17, 28, 29, 35 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsten (U.S. Patent No. 10,886,857 B1) in view of Buritz et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,176,334).
With respect to claim 1, Karsten teaches a transformer 10 (Figs. 1 and 2A) comprising:
a primary winding 16A;
a secondary winding 18A; and
at least one electric shield (combination of shield IS1A and dielectric 36A and or combination of shield IS2A and 38A) comprising at least one dielectric material 36A and or 38A, and the at least one electric shield positioned between the primary winding and the secondary winding,
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises at least one metal layer IS1A and or IS2A that extends a lengthwise distance along a longest dimension (vertical dimension) of the primary winding and/or the secondary winding (col. 4, lines 18-37).
PNG
media_image1.png
580
376
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Karsten does not expressly teach
an insulation material arranged between and at least partially around the primary winding and the secondary winding; and
wherein the at least one electric shield positioned at least partially within the insulation material.
Buritz et al., hereinafter referred to as “Buritz,” teaches a transformer (“transformer” col. 6, line 17) (FIG. 1) comprising:
an insulation material 7 arranged between and at least partially around the primary winding 1 and the secondary winding 9; and
wherein the at least one electric shield 3 positioned at least partially within the insulation material (col. 6, lines 26-41).
PNG
media_image2.png
646
348
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the insulation material as taught by Buritz to the transformer of Karsten to protect the windings and the electric shield for foreign objects, such as moisture and dust, and or to provide insulation that exhibits a very high corona inception stress level (col. 3, lines 14-15).
With respect to claim 2, Karsten teaches a transformer 10 (Figs. 1 and 2A) comprising:
a primary winding 16A;
a secondary winding 18A;
and
at least one electric shield (combination of shield IS1A and dielectric 36A and or combination of shield IS2A and 38A) positioned between the primary winding and the secondary winding,
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises at least one metal layer and at least one dielectric material, the at least one metal layer comprises a plane of metal IS1A and or IS2A that extends a lengthwise distance (vertical distance) between the primary winding and the secondary winding and within the at least one dielectric material 36A and or 38A (col. 4, lines 18-37).
Karsten does not expressly teach
an insulation material arranged between and at least partially around the primary winding and the secondary winding; and
at least one electric shield positioned at least partially within the insulation material, and
wherein the insulation material comprises a potting material.
Buritz teaches a transformer (“transformer” col. 6, line 17) (FIG. 1) comprising:
an insulation material 7 arranged between and at least partially around the primary winding 1 and the secondary winding 9; and
at least one electric shield 3 positioned at least partially within the insulation material, and
wherein the insulation material comprises a potting material (col. 6, lines 26-41). Under broadest reasonable claim interpretation, it’s reasonable to interpret “epoxy impregnated polyester mat” insulation material 7 as the claimed “potting material” because the epoxy impregnated polyester mat insulation material 7 is used to pot or insulate different elements of the transformer.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the insulation material as taught by Buritz to the transformer of Karsten to protect the windings and the electric shield for foreign objects, such as moisture and dust, and or to provide insulation that exhibits a very high corona inception stress level (col. 3, lines 14-15).
With respect to claim 3, best understood in view of 35 USC 112(b) rejection, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the transformer of claim 2,
wherein the at least one metal layer comprises a plurality of metal layers (combination of shield IS1A and dielectric 36A and combination of shield IS2A and 38A), a first metal layer IS1A of the plurality of metal layers is a plane of metal on an exterior surface of the at least one dielectric material 36A of the at least one electric shield, and a second metal layer IS2A of the plurality of metal layers is a plane of metal within an interior of the at least one dielectric material 38A of the at least one electric shield;
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises at least one metal layer within the at least one dielectric material that extends a lengthwise distance along a longest dimension of the primary winding and/or the secondary winding; and
wherein the at least one electric shield is encapsulated within the insulation material (Karsten, col. 4, lines 18-37, Buritz, col. 6, lines 26-41).
With respect to claim 6, Karsten teaches a transformer 10 (Figs. 1 and 2A) comprising:
a primary winding 16A;
a secondary winding 18A; and
a first electric shield (combination of shield IS1A and dielectric 36A) and a second electric shield (combination of shield IS2A and 38A) each comprising at least one dielectric material 36A and 38A, and the first electric shield and the second electric shield are positioned between the primary winding and the secondary winding,
wherein the first electric shield and the second electric shield each comprise at least one metal layer IS1A and IS2A that extends a lengthwise distance (vertical distance) along a longest dimension of the primary winding and/or the secondary winding (col. 4, lines 18-37).
Karsten does not expressly teach
an insulation material arranged between and at least partially around the primary winding and the secondary winding;
the first electric shield and the second electric shield positioned at least partially within the insulation material.
Buritz teaches a transformer (“transformer” col. 6, line 17) (FIG. 1) comprising:
an insulation material 7 arranged between and at least partially around the primary winding 1 and the secondary winding 9;
the first electric shield 3 positioned at least partially within the insulation material (col. 6, lines 26-41). The insulation material incorporation of Buritz to the transformer of Karsten would result in “the first electric shield and the second electric shield positioned at least partially within the insulation material” as claimed.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the insulation material as taught by Buritz to the transformer of Karsten to protect the windings and the electric shield for foreign objects, such as moisture and dust, and or to provide insulation that exhibits a very high corona inception stress level (col. 3, lines 14-15).
With respect to claim 7, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the transformer of claim 1,
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises a laminate structure and/or a planar structure that comprises the at least one metal layer and the at least one dielectric material;
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises at least one metal layer IS1A or IS2A within the at least one dielectric material that extends at least a lengthwise distance of a longest dimension of the primary winding and/or the secondary winding;
wherein the insulation material encapsulates the primary winding and the secondary winding; and
wherein the at least one electric shield is completely encapsulated within the insulation material (Karsten, col. 4, lines 18-37, Buritz, col. 6, lines 26-41).
With respect to claim 11, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the transformer of claim 1, further comprising a magnetic core 20A, wherein the insulation material, the primary winding, the secondary winding, and the at least one electric shield form a winding package, the winding package forming a central opening (opening in which leg 32A is inserted), and a portion 32A of the magnetic core resides within the central opening,
wherein the insulation material comprises a potting material; and
wherein the at least one electric shield further comprises a first metal layer IS1A on an exterior surface of the at least one dielectric material 36A of the at least one electric shield and a second metal layer IS2A within an interior of the at least one dielectric material 38A of the at least one electric shield (Karsten, col. 4, lines 18-37).
With respect to claim 14, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the transformer of claim 1,
wherein the primary winding is configured as a medium voltage winding and the secondary winding is configured as a low voltage winding;
wherein the insulation material comprises a potting material; and
wherein the at least one electric shield is arrangeable to reduce void formation in portions of the insulation material (Buritz, col. 5, lines 4-5 and 19-21).
With respect to claim 17, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the transformer of claim 1,
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises surfaces configured and/or operable to promote encapsulation with reduced voiding;
wherein the insulation material comprises a potting material (Buritz, material 7); and
wherein the insulation material comprises a viscosity in a range from 2500 centipoise (cP) to 5000 cP (Buritz, col. 6, lines 26-41).
With respect to claim 28, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches a solid state transformer comprising the transformer of claim 1 and further comprising:
a first voltage stage (voltage from power source);
a second voltage stage (voltage from secondary winding); and
an isolation stage (stage between first voltage stage and second voltage stage) arranged between the first voltage stage and the second voltage stage, the isolation stage comprising:
the transformer comprising the primary winding, the secondary winding, the insulation material arranged between the primary winding and the secondary winding, and the at least one electric shield (Karsten, col. 4, lines 18-37, Buritz, col. 6, lines 26-41).
With respect to claim 29, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the solid state transformer of claim 28,
wherein the at least one electric shield further comprises a first metal IS1A layer on an exterior surface of the at least one dielectric material 36A of the at least one electric shield and a second metal layer IS2A within an interior of the at least one dielectric material 38A of the at least one electric shield;
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises
wherein the at least one electric shield is encapsulated within the insulation material (Karsten, col. 4, lines 18-37, Buritz, col. 6, lines 26-41).
With respect to claim 35, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the solid state transformer of claim 28, wherein the first voltage stage comprises a medium voltage stage electrically connected to the primary winding, and the second voltage stage comprises a low voltage stage electrically coupled to the secondary winding (Buritz, col. 5, lines 4-5 and 19-21).
With respect to claim 37, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the solid state transformer of claim 28,
wherein the insulation material comprises a potting material; and
wherein the insulation material comprises a viscosity in a range from 2500 centipoise (cP) to 5000 cP (Buritz, col. 6, lines 26-41).
Claims 4, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsten in view of Buritz, as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Inui et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,990,775).
With respect to claim 4, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the transformer of claim 3,
wherein the first metal layer 10 arranged to extend a distance that corresponds to at least a longest dimension (vertical dimension) of the primary winding 1 or the secondary winding 9, and the second metal layer 6 is arranged to extend a distance that is greater than the first metal layer;
wherein the at least one electric shield is configured and/or operable reduce interaction of an electric field with any voids in the insulation material; and
wherein the at least one electric shield is arrangeable to reduce void formation in portions of the insulation material (Buritz, col. 6, lines 27-30, 37-39). Karsten in view of Buritz does not expressly teach the first metal layer is arranged closer to one of the primary winding or the secondary winding than the second metal layer.
Inui et al., hereinafter referred to as “Inui,” teaches a transformer (FIG. 1),
wherein the first metal layer 21A or 22A is arranged closer to one of the primary winding 4 or 5 or the secondary winding (the other of winding 4 or 5) than the second metal layer (the other of metal layer 21A or 22A) (col. 4, lines 1-11). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the first metal layer proximity to the primary or secondary winding as taught by Inui to the transformer of Karsten in view of Buritz to improve the dielectric strength between the electric shield and winding by mounting the first metal layer in tight contact with the primary or secondary winding (col. 2, lines 52-58).
With respect to claim 8, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the transformer of claim 1, wherein the insulation material comprises a potting material; and
wherein the at least one electric shield further comprises a first metal layer IS1A on an exterior surface of the at least one dielectric material 36A of the at least one electric shield and a second metal layer IS2A within an interior of the at least one dielectric material 38A of the at least one electric shield (Karsten, col. 4, lines 18-37). Karsten in view of Buritz does not expressly teach a coil former that at least partially form a shape of at least one of the primary winding and the secondary winding.
Inui et teaches a transformer (FIG. 1) comprising:
a coil former 6 that at least partially form a shape of at least one of the primary winding 4 or 5 and the secondary winding (the other of winding 4 or 5) (col. 3, lines 60-62). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the coil former as taught by Inui to the transformer of Karsten in view of Buritz to facilitate manufacturing of the transformer.
With respect to claim 9, Karsten in view of Buritz and Inui teaches the transformer of claim 8, further comprising a plurality of the at least one electric shield (Karsten, combination of shield IS1A and dielectric 36A and combination of shield IS2A and 38A, or Inui, “[e]lectrostatic shields” col. 4, lines 3 and 4)),
wherein at least one of the primary winding and the secondary winding are arranged at least partially around the coil former and the at least one electric shield; and
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises surfaces configured and/or operable to promote encapsulation with reduced voiding (Karsten, col. 4, lines 18-37, Inui, col. 3, line 60 to col. 4, line 13).
Claim 5 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsten in view of Buritz, as applied to claims 1 and 28 above, and further in view of Lovell et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2015/0235757 A1).
With respect to claim 5, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the transformer of claim 1,
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises surfaces configured and/or operable to promote encapsulation with reduced voiding (Karsten, col. 4, lines 18-37, and Buritz, col. 6, lines 26-41).
Karsten in view of Buritz does not expressly teach
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises a printed circuit board;
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises a laminate structure and/or a planar structure that comprises the printed circuit board and the at least one dielectric material; and
wherein the printed circuit board comprises the at least one metal layer.
Lovell et al., hereinafter referred to as “Lovell,” teaches a transformer (e.g. FIG. 2),
wherein the at least one electric shield 20 comprises a printed circuit board 11;
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises a laminate structure and/or a planar structure that comprises the printed circuit board and the at least one dielectric material; and
wherein the printed circuit board comprises at least one metal layer (“copper traces”) (para. [0024]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the electric shield as taught by Lovell to the transformer of Karsten in view of Buritz to reduce the partial discharge (para. [0028]).
With respect to claim 30, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the solid state transformer of claim 28.
Karsten in view of Buritz does not expressly teach
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises a printed circuit board;
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises a laminate structure and/or a planar structure that comprises the printed circuit board and the at least one dielectric material; and wherein the printed circuit board comprises the at least one metal layer.
Lovell teaches a solid state transformer (e.g. FIG. 2),
wherein the at least one electric shield 20 comprises a printed circuit board 11;
wherein the at least one electric shield comprises a laminate structure and/or a planar structure that comprises the printed circuit board and the at least one dielectric material; and
wherein the printed circuit board comprises at least one metal layer (“copper traces”) (para. [0024]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the electric shield as taught by Lovell to the transformer of Karsten in view of Buritz to reduce the partial discharge (para. [0028]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsten in view of Buritz, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tal et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2021/0027936 A1).
With respect to claim 15, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the transformer of claim 1,
wherein the at least one electric shield is configured and/or operable reduce interaction of an electric field with any voids in the insulation material,
and
wherein the at least one electric shield further comprises a first metal layer IS1A on an exterior surface of the at least one dielectric material 36A of the at least one electric shield and a second metal layer IS2A within an interior of the at least one dielectric material 38A of the at least one electric shield (Karsten, col. 4, lines 18-37, and Buritz, col. 6, lines 26-41).
Karsten in view of Buritz does not expressly teach
at least one of the primary winding and the secondary winding comprises multiple-strand wiring.
Tal teaches a transformer (FIG. 3),
wherein at least one of the primary winding 310 or 210b and the secondary winding (the other of winding 310 or 210b) comprises multiple-strand wiring (para. [0016]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the multiple-strand wiring as taught by Tal to the transformer of Karsten in view of Buritz to reduce skin effect.
Claims 31 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsten in view of Buritz, as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of MacLennan (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2017/0126114 A1).
With respect to claim 31, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the solid state transformer of claim 28. I Karsten in view of Buritz does not expressly teach at least one of the first voltage stage and the second voltage stage comprises a wide band gap switching device.
MacLennan teaches a solid state transformer (e.g. FIG. 1D), wherein at least one of the first voltage stage 135 and the second voltage stage 136 comprises a wide band gap switching device (para. [0072]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the wide band gap switching as taught by MacLennan to the solid state transformer of Karsten in view of Buritz to reduce switching losses (para. [0071]).
With respect to claim 32, Karsten in view of Buritz and MacLennan teaches the solid state transformer of claim 31, wherein the wide band gap switching device comprises a silicon carbide switching device (MacLennan, para. [0072]).
Claims 33 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsten in view of Buritz, as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Kurs et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2015/0270719 A1).
With respect to claim 33, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the solid state transformer of claim 28. Karsten in view of Buritz does not expressly teach the isolation stage comprises a wide band gap switching device.
Kur et al., hereinafter referred to as “Kur,” teaches a solid state transformer (Fig. 43), wherein the isolation stage 2402S-2402D (paras. [0406] and [0378]) comprises a wide band gap switching device (“silicon carbides devices”) (para. [0390]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the wide band gap switching as taught by Kur to the solid state transformer of Karsten in view of Buritz to reduce switching losses.
With respect to claim 34, Karsten in view of Buritz and Kur teaches the solid state transformer of claim 33, wherein the wide band gap switching device comprises a silicon carbide switching device (“silicon carbides devices”) (para. [0390]) (Kur, para. [0390]).
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karsten in view of Buritz, as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of Delanoe et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2017/0353049 A1), and Peschel (U.S. Patent No. 3,703,692).
ith respect to claim 36, Karsten in view of Buritz teaches the solid state transformer of claim 28.
Karsten in view of Buritz does not expressly teach
wherein the first voltage stage is operable to convert AC-to-DC;
wherein the second voltage stage is operable to convert DC-to-AC.
Delanoe et al., hereinafter referred to as “Delanoe,” teaches a solid stated transformer (FIG. 7),
wherein the first voltage stage 27 is operable to convert AC-to-DC;
wherein the second voltage stage 29 is operable to convert DC-to-AC (para. [0039]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the converters as taught by Delanoe to the solid state transformer of Karsten in view of Buritz to provide the required input and output current to meet design requirements.
Karsten in view of Buritz does also not expressly teach the solid state transformer is rated for operation up to 485 kilovolt-amperes.
Peschel teaches a transformer (Fig. 3), wherein the solid state transformer 44 is rated for operation up to 485 kilovolt-amperes (col. 7, lines 17-21).
PNG
media_image3.png
307
490
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the rated transformer as taught by Peschel to the solid state transformer of Karsten in view of Buritz to provide the desired power to meet design requirements for certain application.
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 MANGTIN LIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0800-1700.
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, Shawki S. Ismail can be reached at 571-272-3985. 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.
/MANG TIN BIK LIAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights