DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1 and 9 are amended
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by James (US 20180330862 A1).
Regarding Claim 1:
James teaches that an variable-impedance electric transformer (100. Fig. 1), comprising one or more transformation phases (102, Fig.1; para 0034-0040) wounding around a magnetic core (202, Fig. 4; para 0041-0051), wherein at least one transformation phase includes:
conductive windings (208A, 208B; Fig. 3; para 0053-0063)
a first impedance-varying auxiliary winding (see Fig. 5A) divided into impedance
circuit modules (304F1-F3 , Fig. 3), the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding having a magnetic polarity (see para 0050);
a second impedance-varying auxiliary winding (see Fig. 5A) divided into impedance circuit modules (304E1-E3, Fig. 3), the second impedance-varying auxiliary winding having an inverse magnetic polarity (see para 0060) to the magnetic polarity of the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding, wherein the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding and second impedance-varying auxiliary winding have a same number of impedance circuit modules (both first and second impedance-varying auxiliary winding have 3 circuit modules with same winding; see para 0045);
wherein the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding and second impedance-varying auxiliary winding are connected in series (see Fig. 3), defining impedance variation modules by interposing the impedance circuit modules one by one, each impedance variation module includes one impedance circuit modules of the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding connected in series with one impedance
circuit modules of the second impedance-varying auxiliary winding, and each impedance variation module having a impedance tap (see Fig. 3);
a stepped-impedance-tap selector (i.e. switch, 116) configured to be electrically coupled to the impedance taps of the impedance variation modules; and
an impedance controller (not shown. Implicit in switch 116, see Claim 8) configured to control the stepped-impedance-tap selector for varying the impedance of the transformation phase or the electric transformer, wherein said same number of impedance circuit modules.
As of functional limitation “wherein said same number of impedance circuit modules permits the impedance of the electric transformer to change without affecting a transformation ratio during operation under load” It is seen that James certainly teaches substantially identical structure as shown in Fig. 1 and 3 such as a first impedance-varying auxiliary winding, second impedance-varying auxiliary winding, same number of impedance circuit modules in same filed of endeavor. As per MPEP § 2112.01.I guideline, where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Therefore, it is inherent to be labeled as wherein said same number of impedance circuit modules permits the impedance of the electric transformer to change without affecting a transformation ratio during operation under load.
Regarding Claim 2:
As applied to claim 1, James teaches that the electric transformer is a column- type (construed from Fig. 1) {or armored-type electric transformer}.
Regarding Claim 3:
As applied to claim 2, James teaches that the electric transformer is a column-type electric transformer (construed from Fig. 1), and the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding and second impedance-varying auxiliary winding are arranged radially (see Fig. 3) or axially to the conductive windings.
Regarding Claim 4:
As applied to claim 2, James teaches that the electric transformer is armored- type electric transformer, and the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding (see Fig. 3) and second impedance-varying auxiliary winding are arranged in a stacked manner in side-by-side relationship to the conductive windings (see Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 5:
As applied to claim 1, James teaches that the conductive windings are a primary winding (206, Fig. 4) and a secondary winding (see para 0053).
Regarding Claim 6:
As applied to claim 1, James teaches that the impedance controller is configured for varying the impedance of at least one transformation phase or the electric transformer under load (see claim 3, 5 and 8; para 0097).
Regarding Claim 7:
As applied to claim 1, James teaches that the electric transformer is a power (see para 0034) or distribution electric transformer.
Regarding Claim 8:
As applied to claim 1, James teaches that the electric transformer is a single- phase or multi-phase transformer (see para 0034-0040)
Regarding Claim 9:
James teaches that a method (see claims 16-20) for varying the impedance in an electric transformer (100, Fig. 1) comprising one or more transformation phases wounding around a magnetic core (202, Fig. 4), the method comprising the steps of:
disposing conductive windings (208A, 208B; Fig. 3; para 0053-0063) ;
disposing a first impedance-varying auxiliary winding (see Fig. 5A) divided into impedance circuit modules (304F1-F3 Fig. 3), the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding having a magnetic polarity (see para 0050);
disposing a second impedance-varying auxiliary winding (see Fig. 5A) divided into impedance circuit modules (304 E1-E3 Fig. 3), the second impedance-varying auxiliary winding having an inverse magnetic polarity (see para 0060) to the magnetic polarity of the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding, wherein the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding and second impedance-varying auxiliary winding have a same number of impedance circuit modules (both first and second impedance-varying auxiliary winding have 3 circuit modules with same winding; see para 0045),
connecting the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding and second impedance-varying auxiliary winding in series (see Fig. 3), by interposing the impedance circuit modules one by one for defining impedance variation modules, each impedance variation module includes one impedance circuit modules of the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding connected in series with one impedance circuit modules of the second impedance-varying auxiliary winding, and each impedance variation module having an impedance tap;
electrically coupling a stepped-impedance-tap selector (116) to the impedance taps of the impedance variation modules; and
controlling, by an impedance controller (not shown. Implicit in switch 116), the stepped-impedance-tap selector for varying the impedance of the transformation phase or the electric transformer.
As of functional limitation “wherein said same number of impedance circuit modules permits the impedance of the electric transformer to change without affecting a transformation ratio during operation under load” It is seen that James certainly teaches substantially identical structure as shown in Fig. 1 such as a first impedance-varying auxiliary winding, second impedance-varying auxiliary winding, same number of impedance circuit modules in same filed of endeavor. As per MPEP § 2112.01.I guideline, where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Therefore, it is inherent to be labeled as wherein said same number of impedance circuit modules permits the impedance of the electric transformer to change without affecting a transformation ratio during operation under load.
Regarding Claim 10:
As applied to claim 9, James teaches that the step of disposing the first impedance-varying auxiliary winding divided into impedance circuit modules, the first impedance- varying auxiliary winding is arranged radially (see Fig. 4) {or axially to the conductive windings} when the electric transformer is of the column type (see Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 11:
As applied to claim 9, James teaches that the step of disposing the second impedance-varying auxiliary winding divided into impedance circuit modules, the second impedance-varying auxiliary winding is arranged radially (see Fig. 4) {or axially to the conductive windings} when the electric transformer is of the column type (see Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 12:
As applied to claim 9, James teaches that the step of disposing a first impedance-varying auxiliary winding divided into impedance circuit modules, the first impedance- varying auxiliary winding is arranged in a stacked manner in side-by-side relationship (see Fig. 4) to the conductive windings when the electric transformer is an armored-type electric transformer.
Regarding Claim 13:
As applied to claim 9, James teaches that the step of disposing a second impedance-varying auxiliary winding divided into impedance circuit modules, the second impedance- varying auxiliary winding is arranged in a stacked manner (see Fig. 4) in side-by-side relationship to the conductive windings when the electric transformer is an armored-type electric transformer.
Regarding Claim 14:
As applied to claim 9, James teaches that the step of controlling by an impedance controller the stepped-impedance-tap selector for varying the impedance of the transformation phase or the electric transformer, the impedance controller is configured for varying the impedance of at least one transformation phase or the electric transformer under load (see claim 3, 5, 8 and 20).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied reference, and/or newly found prior art reference(s).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A list of pertinent prior art is attached in form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kazi Hossain whose telephone number is 571-272-8182. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from Monday to Thursday 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM (EST).
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 https:/www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Shawki Ismail can be reached on 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.
/KAZI HOSSAIN/
Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/SHAWKI S ISMAIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights