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 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 13-24 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.
Claim 13 recites “three double taped coils” renders the claim indefinite on the one hand, it may define coils, each of them taped with a two-layer tape, and on the other hand, it may suggest that the coils are taped twice, but leaves open to which device they are taped in this case.
Claim 13 further recites "two exciting windings ... sharing the same three double taped coils" is not clear because it is unclear what "share" means in this context: does is mean time sharing, or does it mean that one of the two exiting windings, in the sense of one of the two exciting coils, is allocated to one double taped coil, whereas the other of the two exiting windings is allocated to the remaining two of the three double taped coils.
Claim 13 includes the expressions "regulating the voltage" and "regulating the voltage level" appears to refer to the same subject-matter because regulating a voltage can be understood also to regulate a voltage level. The choice of two different expressions of apparently the same subject-matter renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 15 recites the limitation the “three connected coil windings”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 recites the limitation the “the two double tapped coil windings”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Dependent claims are rejected based on dependency and applicants are urged to thoroughly review claims to overcome any 112 rejections that may have been overlooked by the examiner.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wichert et al. US publication no.: US 2020/0052486 A1.
Regarding claim 13, Wichert et al. teach, A phase shifting transformer (see figures 3-5 and paragraphs 7-12 and 35-47), comprising: two exciting windings (see windings 110.2, 110.3, figures 3-4; paragraphs 41-42) sharing the same three double taped coils (see figures 3-4, where they share three double taped coils because they share a common core 115); a first excited winding comprising three connected coils (110.2, figures 3-4; paragraph 44, where it is explained that the coils are phase shifting), for a phase shift regulation; and a second excited winding comprising three connected coils(110.3, figures 3-4; paragraph 44, where it is explained that the coils are phase shifting), for a voltage regulation (as further explained in paragraph 44, the voltage is made variable and regulated based on the adjustments made to the regulator tap); each of the two exciting windings regulating the voltage of one coil of the second excited winding, and regulating the voltage level of one coil of the first excited winding (see paragraph 35, where the both of the exciter coils are on the same common core 115 and therefore, they influence each other magnetically. As further seen in paragraph 44, the coils are made variable by having variable inductances which allows to have variable/regulating voltage).
Regarding claim 13, Wichert et al. teach, The phase shifting transformer according to claim 13, the two exciting windings sharing the same three double taped coils being star, resp. delta, connected (see paragraph 36 and 49, where it can be seen that they have a common core and delta connected).
Regarding claim 15, Wichert et al. teach, The phase shifting transformer according to claim 13, the three connected coil windings, for a phase shift regulation, being delta, resp. star, connected(see paragraph 36 and 49, where it can be seen that they have a common core and delta connected).
Regarding claim 16, Wichert et al. teach, The phase shifting transformer according to claim 13, the three connected coil windings, for a voltage regulation, being star, resp. delta, connected(see paragraph 36 and 49, where it can be seen that they have a common core and delta connected).
Regarding claim 17, Wichert et al. teach, The phase shifting transformer according to claim 13, further comprising means to add a further constant dephasing angle (see figures 5a-5b, where the phase shifting angle is disclosed).
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wichert et al. US publication no.: US 2020/0052486 A1 in view of Sen et al. US Patent No.: US 6,396,248 B1.
Regarding claim 18, Wichert et al. is silent on specifically teaching, the phase shifting transformer according to claim 17, the means to add a further constant dephasing angle comprising at least three coils, each one of the three coils being connected in series with one of the three connected coils of the first excited winding.
However, Sen et al. teach: the means to add a further constant dephasing angle comprising at least three coils, each one of the three coils being connected in series with one of the three connected coils of the first excited winding (See figure 23 where the coils are connected in series).
In view of Sen et al.’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Wichert et al. to include; the means to add a further constant dephasing angle comprising at least three coils, each one of the three coils being connected in series with one of the three connected coils of the first excited winding, for the purpose of o
Claims 19-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wichert et al. US publication no.: US 2020/0052486 A1 in view of Zhou et al. US publication no.: US 6,198,647 B1.
Regarding claim 19, Wichert et al. teach, a phase shifting transformer according to claim 13 (see rejection of claim 13 above).
Wichert et al. is silent on specifically teaching: a transformer comprising an autotransformer.
However, Zhou et al. teach: a transformer comprising an autotransformer (see abstract and figure 1).
In view of Zhou et al.’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Wichert et al. to include; the means to add a further constant dephasing angle comprising at least three coils, each one of the three coils being connected in series with one of the three connected coils of the first excited winding, for the purpose of providing various phase shift transformers.
Regarding claim 20, Zhou et al. teach, the transformer according to claim 19, the autotransformer being of the step-down type (see abstract and figure 1).
Regarding claim 21, Zhou et al. teach, The transformer according to claim 19, the autotransformer being of the step-up type (see abstract and figure 1).
Regarding claim 22, Wichert et al. teach the phase shifting and voltage adjustment as seen in figures 3-5 but is silent on specifically teaching, the transformer according to claim 19, the autotransformer being a quadbooster.
However, one could’ve easily configured the transformer to be a quadbooster based on the teachings of Wichert in figure 3-5.
In view of Wichert et al.’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to include; the autotransformer being a quadbooster, for the purpose of achieving power flow control.
Regarding claim 23, Wichert et al. is silent on specifically teaching, The transformer according to claim 19, the two double tapped coil windings being in a first tank, the three coils windings, in view of a phase shift regulation, and the three coils windings in view of a voltage regulation, being in a second tank.
However, providing windings/coils in different tanks appears to be more of an outcome of a normal design sequence and procedure. One with ordinary skills in the art could’ve easily configured the modular systems, in order to facilitate maintenance and exchange and hence would’ve been obvious to one with ordinary skills in the art, with the apparatus as taught by Wichert et al. as modified to include; he two double tapped coil windings being in a first tank, the three coils windings, in view of a phase shift regulation, and the three coils windings in view of a voltage regulation, being in a second tank, , in order to facilitate maintenance.
Regarding claim 24, Wichert et al .teach, A method for regulating the voltage of a transformer according to claim 19 (see rejections of claims 13 and 19 above), wherein: the level of the voltage provided is regulated by a three coil excited winding of the phase shifting transformer (see figures 3-5 and paragraphs 7-12 and 35-47); and the phase provided is regulated by the other three coil excited winding of the phase shifting transformer winding (see paragraph 35, where the both of the exciter coils are on the same common core 115 and therefore, they influence each other magnetically. As further seen in paragraph 44, the coils are made variable by having variable inductances which allows to have variable/regulating voltage).
Wichert et al. is silent on specifically teaching: a transformer comprising an autotransformer.
However, Zhou et al. teach: a transformer comprising an autotransformer (see abstract and figure 1).
In view of Zhou et al.’s teachings, it would’ve been obvious to one with the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, with the apparatus as taught by Wichert et al. to include; the means to add a further constant dephasing angle comprising at least three coils, each one of the three coils being connected in series with one of the three connected coils of the first excited winding, for the purpose of providing various phase shift transformers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZOHEB S IMTIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4308. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-730pm.
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, Eduardo Colon Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/ZOHEB S IMTIAZ/Primary Examiner , Art Unit 2846