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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 11 objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 11, the claim 11 in line 2 recites “DCM mode”. For clarity and proper claim terminology, the claim should recite, “discontinuous conduction mode”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Taddeo et al. (US 2013/0020993), herein after Taddeo.
Regarding claim 28, Taddeo discloses an electric vehicle configured for simultaneous AC and DC charging (fig. 2 and 4; roadside assistance vehicle 400 stores charging station components in storage compartments 402 of the vehicle 400 and provides an AC connector 404 and a DC connector 406 to a stranded EV 408. The stranded EV 408 bears an AC charging port 410 and/or a DC charging port 412, paragraph [0056]) comprising: an on-board charger (onboard EV battery inherently has the onboard charger to converter AC in to DC with the onboard electronics to control the state of charge of the battery, paragraph [0049], fig. 2); a battery (228, fig. 2); a charging port (226, fig. 2) in electrical communication with the on-board charger and the battery, the charging port including a first portion configured to be in electrical communication with an AC source (the charging port 226 is connected to the AC source 220, fig. 2) and a second portion configured to be in electrical communication with a DC source (the charging port 226 is also connected to the DC power source 222, fig. 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-12, 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pfizenmaier et al. (US 2021/0031641), herein after Pfizenmaier, Meilin (CN 106655830), with publication date: May 10. 2017; attached is human translation, and B. R. Ananthapadmanabha, “Improved Power Quality Switched Inductor Cuk Converter for Battery Charging Applications”, NOVEMBER 2018.
Regarding claim 1, Pfizenmaier a charger (1, fig. 1), comprising:
a buck converter (The DC-to-DC converter 7 has a buck-boost stage, fig. 1); and a converter (5, 6, fig. 1).
Pfizenmaier discloses a charger with a buck convert and the converter (5,6, fig. 1). Pfizenmaier does discloses the converter has the power factor correction circuit (paragraph [0021]).
However, Pfizenmaier does not explicitly disclose the converter includes a totem pole BL boost structure at the input side, a switched inductor Cuk converter at the output side, the output side connected to the buck converter.
Meilin discloses a totem pole bridgeless PFC circuit at the input side (Abstract, 3+4fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger PFC (5, fig. 1) to be a totem pole BL boost structure as taught by Meilin, in order to have the structure whose implementation cost is low, the decoupling effect is fed back, the dependence of the decoupling performance on parameters of the system is eliminated, and meanwhile, the decoupling control method and system have relatively high control robustness (Abstract).
Pfizenmaier also does not explicitly disclose the converter (6, fig. 1) is the Cuk converter.
Ananthapadmanabha does discloses a CUK converter in the battery charger configuration (page 9413; A. topology section).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger to have a CUK converter as taught by Ananthapadmanabha, in order to have continuous voltage (page 9413; A. topology section).
Regarding claim 2, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 1. However, Pfizenmaier does not disclose that the PFC circuit is totem pole BL boost structure having the specific structure.
Meilin discloses wherein the totem pole BL boost structure (fig. 1) comprises an input inductor Li (Lg, fig. 1), first line diode D1 (D1, fig. 1), second line diode D2 (D2, fig. 1), first switch Sw1 (S1, fig. 1), second switch Sw2 (S2, fig. 1), and an intermediate capacitor Ci (Cd, fig.1), wherein: an end of the input inductor Li is connected to an AC input vs at a first node; a cathode of first line diode D1, first switch Sw1, and a positive side of intermediate capacitor Ci are connected at a second node (see the annotated fig. I);
first and second switches Sw1, Sw2 and the AC input vs are connected at a third node; another end of the input inductor Li, an anode of first line diode D1 and a cathode of second line diode D2 are connected at a fourth node; and an anode of second line diode D2, and second switch Sw2 are connected at a fifth node (see the annotated fig. I).
PNG
media_image1.png
448
468
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. I
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger PFC (5, fig. 1) to be a totem pole BL boost structure as taught by Meilin, in order to have the structure whose implementation cost is low, the decoupling effect is fed back, the dependence of the decoupling performance on parameters of the system is eliminated, and meanwhile, the decoupling control method and system have relatively high control robustness (Abstract).
Regarding claim 3, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 2. However, Pfizenmaier does not disclose wherein the first and second switches Sw1, Sw2 both operate simultaneously during both positive and negative half cycles, while first and second line diodes D1 and D2 operate alternately in positive and negative half-cycles.
Meilin discloses the first and second switches Sw1, Sw2 both operate simultaneously during both positive and negative half cycles, while first and second line diodes D1 and D2 operate alternately in positive and negative half-cycles (fig. 4; 2 and 5 shows that both the switches are in operating condition and D1 and D2 operate alternatively).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger PFC (5, fig. 1) to be a totem pole BL boost structure as taught by Meilin, in order to have the structure whose implementation cost is low, the decoupling effect is fed back, the dependence of the decoupling performance on parameters of the system is eliminated, and meanwhile, the decoupling control method and system have relatively high control robustness (Abstract).
Regarding claim 4, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 2. However, Pfizenmaier and Meilin do not disclose the switched inductor Cuk converter comprises first and second output inductors Lo1,2 and first and second output diodes Do1,2 coupled in a switched inductor configuration.
Ananthapadmanabha discloses wherein the switched inductor Cuk converter (see the annotated fig. II)comprises first and second output inductors Lo1,2 and first and second output diodes Do1,2 coupled in a switched inductor configuration (Lo1 and Lo2 is connected to Do1 and Do2, annotated fig. II).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger to have a CUK converter as taught by Ananthapadmanabha, in order to have continuous voltage (page 9413; A. topology section).
PNG
media_image2.png
378
545
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. II
Regarding claim 5, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 4. However, Pfizenmaier does not disclose the PFC circuit (5, fig. 1) is totem pole bridgeless structure and the converter (6, fig. 1) Cuk converter. Meilin discloses a totem pole bridgeless PFC circuit at the input side (Abstract, 3+4fig. 1).
Ananthapadmanabha does disclose a first end of the first output inductor Lo1, an anode of first output diode Do1 and a negative side of the input side PFC structure are connected at a sixth node; a second end of the first output inductor Lo1 and an anode of second output diode Do2 are connected at a seventh node; a cathode of first output diode Do1 and a first end of the second output inductor L.sub.o2 are connected at an eighth node; a cathode of second output diode Do2, a second end of the second output inductor Lo2, and a negative side of the input side PFC structure are connected at the fifth node (annotated fig. III).
PNG
media_image3.png
363
580
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. III
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger to have a CUK converter as taught by Ananthapadmanabha, in order to have continuous voltage (page 9413; A. topology section).
Regarding claim 6, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 5. Pfizenmaier further discloses wherein the node of the converter is also connected to a negative side of the DC-link and to the buck converter ( the converter 6 is connected to the intermediate capacitor 3 and the buck converter 7, fig. 1). However, Pfizenmaier does not disclose the converter (6, fig. 1) output side is the CUK converter.
Ananthapadmanabha discloses a CUK converter with the capacitor at the output side (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger to have a CUK converter as taught by Ananthapadmanabha, in order to have continuous voltage (page 9413; A. topology section).
Regarding claim 8, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 1. However, Pfizenmaier does not disclose explicitly disclose a cascaded dual loop proportional integral (PI) controller controls the converter.
Meilin discloses a cascaded dual loop proportional integral (PI) controller controls the converter to get desired voltages an currents to charge the vehicle battery (fig. 3; pages 2-3).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger PFC (5, fig. 1) to be a totem pole BL boost structure as taught by Meilin, in order to have the structure whose implementation cost is low, the decoupling effect is fed back, the dependence of the decoupling performance on parameters of the system is eliminated, and meanwhile, the decoupling control method and system have relatively high control robustness (Abstract).
Regarding claim 9, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 2. Meilin further discloses wherein the converter has a first operating mode that begins when the first and second switches Sw1, Sw2 are turned ON simultaneously and the first line diode D1 is in a conducting state(fig. 4; 2nd part).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger PFC (5, fig. 1) to be a totem pole BL boost structure as taught by Meilin, in order to have the structure whose implementation cost is low, the decoupling effect is fed back, the dependence of the decoupling performance on parameters of the system is eliminated, and meanwhile, the decoupling control method and system have relatively high control robustness (Abstract).
Regarding claim 10, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 2. Meilin further discloses the converter has a second operating mode where the first and second switches Sw1, Sw2 are OFF, and one of the first and second switches Sw1, Sw2 is forward biased (fig. 4; part 1 where both the switches are off and sw2 is forward biased).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger PFC (5, fig. 1) to be a totem pole BL boost structure as taught by Meilin, in order to have the structure whose implementation cost is low, the decoupling effect is fed back, the dependence of the decoupling performance on parameters of the system is eliminated, and meanwhile, the decoupling control method and system have relatively high control robustness (Abstract).
Regarding claim 11, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 2. Meilin further discloses wherein the converter has a third operating mode where the first and second switches Sw1, Sw2 are OFF, and the converter is in DCM mode (when both the switches are off the current will not flow in the circuit, fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger PFC (5, fig. 1) to be a totem pole BL boost structure as taught by Meilin, in order to have the structure whose implementation cost is low, the decoupling effect is fed back, the dependence of the decoupling performance on parameters of the system is eliminated, and meanwhile, the decoupling control method and system have relatively high control robustness (Abstract).
Regarding claim 12, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 1. Meilin further discloses wherein the converter is operated in discontinuous conduction mode (DCM) (when both the switches are off the converter would be in discontinuous conduction mode, fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger PFC (5, fig. 1) to be a totem pole BL boost structure as taught by Meilin, in order to have the structure whose implementation cost is low, the decoupling effect is fed back, the dependence of the decoupling performance on parameters of the system is eliminated, and meanwhile, the decoupling control method and system have relatively high control robustness (Abstract).
Regarding claim 27, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 1. Pfizenmaier further discloses wherein the charger is either a type-I on-board EV charger or a type-II on-board EV charger (It is conceivable for the DC-to-DC converter of the on-board charger to be bidirectional and hence able to be operated in two directions (type II), paragraph [0010]).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pfizenmaier (US 2021/0031641), Meilin (CN 106655830), with publication date: May 10. 2017; attached is human translation, and B. R. Ananthapadmanabha, “Improved Power Quality Switched Inductor Cuk Converter for Battery Charging Applications”, NOVEMBER 2018. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Vahedi et al. (US 2020/0070672), herein after.
Regarding claim 13, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 1. Pfizenmaier does disclose a converter connected to the battery to charge it. However, they do not explicitly disclose DC link voltage of the converter is controlled at 200V and delivered power is 2 kW.
Vahedi discloses a converter with a controller to control the output DC voltage at 200V (paragraph [0093]-[0095]) and delivered power of 2 kW (For a typical 1 to 3 kW range of power to be delivered (during all charging states of full power to under-power), paragraph [0082]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger in view of Meilin, and Ananthapadmanabha to have specific voltage and output power as taught by Vahedi, in order to have safe overnight charging, workplace parking, or in scenarios where high-power electrical infrastructure is unavailable.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pfizenmaier (US 2021/0031641), Meilin (CN 106655830), with publication date: May 10. 2017; attached is human translation, and B. R. Ananthapadmanabha, “Improved Power Quality Switched Inductor Cuk Converter for Battery Charging Applications”, NOVEMBER 2018. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Oraw et al. (US 2008/0239772), herein after Oraw.
Regarding claim 14, Pfizenmaier in view of Meilin and Ananthapadmanabha discloses the charger of claim 1. Pfizenmaier does disclose a buck converter connected to the battery to charge it. However, they do not explicitly disclose the converter has a converter voltage gain M less than 0.5.
Oraw discloses a buck converter with the voltage gain can be less than 0.5 (fig. 9. Paragraph [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s charger in view of Meilin, and Ananthapadmanabha to have a specific voltage gain as taught by Oraw, in order to have optimize efficiency in high-power, bidirectional applications.
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pfizenmaier (US 2021/0031641), and Bhim Singh, “An EV Battery Charger with Power Factor Corrected Bridgeless Zeta Converter Topology”, Published in: 2016.
Regarding claim 15, Pfizenmaier discloses a charger(1, fig. 1), comprising: a buck converter(The DC-to-DC converter 7 has a buck-boost stage, fig. 1); Pfizenmaier further discloses a converter (5,6, fig. 1) is connected at the input side and to the buck converter to charge the vehicle battery.
However, Pfizenmaier does not explicitly disclose that the converter is a bridgeless (BL) Zeta converter that includes an EMI filter connected to a BL Zeta converter.
Singh discloses an EV battery charger where the input power is connected to a bridgeless (BL) Zeta converter that includes an EMI filter connected to a BL Zeta converter (fig. 1 on page 2).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s converter to be bridgeless zeta converter with EMI filter as taught by Singh, in or der to have low output ripple voltage, a non-inverted output, stable output response and effective control (abstract).
Regarding claim 16, Pfizenmaier in view of Singh discloses the charger of the claim 15. Singh further discloses the BL Zeta converter includes a split capacitor at an output of the BL Zeta converter(C1 and Cd is at the output side of the bridgeless zeta converter, fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s converter to be bridgeless zeta converter with EMI filter as taught by Singh, in or der to have low output ripple voltage, a non-inverted output, stable output response and effective control (abstract).
Regarding claim 17, Pfizenmaier in view of Singh discloses the charger of the claim 15. Singh further discloses wherein the EMI filter includes a filter inductor Lf (Lf, fig. 1) and a filter capacitor Cf (Cf, fig. 1), wherein a first end of the filter inductor Lf is connected to an AC input source vS (Lf is connected to AC power supply, fig. 1)and a second end of the filter inductor Lf is connected to a positive side of the filter capacitor Cf at a first node (Lf is connected to Cf, fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Pfizenmaier’s converter to be bridgeless zeta converter with EMI filter as taught by Singh, in or der to have low output ripple voltage, a non-inverted output, stable output response and effective control (abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 18 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 18, none of the prior art alone in combination discloses a charger comprising, “the BL Zeta converter comprising a switch with an upper switch SU and a lower switch SL in series, an input inductor Li, a transfer capacitor Ci, a first diode D1, a second diode D2, an output inductor Lo, a first DC link capacitor Cdc1; and a second DC link capacitor Cdc2; wherein: the switch, an end of input inductor Li and a positive side of transfer capacitor Ci are connected at a second node; a negative side of transfer capacitor Ci, an anode of second diode D2, a cathode of first diode D1, and an end of output inductor Lo are connected at a third node; a cathode of second diode D2, a positive side of second DC link capacitor Cdc2, and the buck converter are connected at a fourth node; an anode of first diode D1, a negative side of first DC link capacitor Cdc1 and the buck converter are connected at a fifth node; and a negative side of second DC link capacitor Cdc2, a positive side of DC link capacitor Cdc2, another end of output inductor Lo, another end of input inductor Li, a negative side of filter capacitor Cf, and the AC source vS are connected at a sixth node.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SADIA KOUSAR whose telephone number is (571)272-3386. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at (571) 272-2147. 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.
SADIA . KOUSAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights