Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/116,089

AIR CONDITIONER AND METHOD FOR DETERMINING ENERGY CONSUMPTION OF AIR CONDITIONER

Non-Final OA §101§103
Filed
Mar 01, 2023
Examiner
CHAN, KAWING
Art Unit
2846
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Qingdao Hisense Hitachi Air-Conditioning Systems Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
559 granted / 765 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
789
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
51.0%
+11.0% vs TC avg
§102
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
§112
23.3%
-16.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 765 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §103
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/05/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Regarding claim 10, the claim is directed to abstract idea related to mathematical relationship that can be performed by human mind and/or human activity. The following underlined for emphasis: determining a present operating frequency of the controlled device, and a present output current and a present output power of the frequency converter; determining a present efficiency of the frequency converter according to the present operating frequency of the controlled device and the present output current of the frequency converter; and determining a present input power of the frequency converter according to the present efficiency of the frequency converter and the present output power of the frequency converter. First, determining present operating frequency of the controlled device, a preset output current and a present output power of the frequency converter can be done by reading measured and/or recorded data by human; Second, determining a present efficiency of the frequency converter and present input power of the frequency converter are simply using a mathematical relationship as evidenced by the specification as originally filed, and the determining (i.e. calculation) can be easily done by human mind (see Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981)). The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because all the recited limitations are identified as abstract idea. Therefore, this judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because these additional claim element(s) do not provide meaningful limitation(s) to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claim(s) amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Thus, the claim(s) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter. Regarding claims 11-18, all the further recited determining steps are either abstract idea that can be performed by human mind and/or human activity, or related to mathematical relationship and/or mathematical formula. And, the claims do not include additional element that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because all the recited limitations are identified as abstract idea. Therefore, for the same reasons explained above in rejection of claim 10, these claims are directed to non-statutory subject matter. 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 and 7-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geng (CN 106123251 B) (hereinafter rejections rely on provided equivalent English machine translation) in view of Jadric et al. (US 8,353,174 B1). Regarding claims 1 and 10, Geng discloses an air conditioner and a method for an air conditioner (e.g. Abstract & Fig. 1), comprising: a controlled device (e.g. Abstract & Fig. 1: compressor 8); a frequency converter (e.g. Fig. 1: 7) connected to the controlled device and configured to regulate an operating frequency of the controlled device (output power of the inverter control speed of the compressor); and a controller (e.g. Abstract: air-conditioning controller) connected to the frequency converter and configured to: determine a present operating frequency of the controlled device (e.g. [0040-0041]: speed of the compressor rotor is used to calculate input power implies determination of the speed), and a present output current and a present output power of the frequency converter (e.g. [0035-0043]: iA-iC & id, iq, Pout); and determine a present input power of the frequency converter according to the present efficiency of the frequency converter and the present output power of the frequency converter (e.g. [0044]). Geng fails to disclose, but Jadric teaches determine a present efficiency of the frequency converter according to the present operating frequency of the controlled device and the present output current of the frequency converter (e.g. col 5 lines 9-19: efficiency as a function of current and frequency). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Geng with the teachings of Jadric, since Jadric teaches it is well-known in the art to determine efficiency based on current and frequency, and utilize a well-known method of determining efficiency in Geng would have been obvious to one skilled in the art since it is merely simple substituting one well-known method with another (i.e. utilizing a preset table or perform calculation), and the modification would have yielded only predictable results to one skilled in the art. Regarding claims 7 and 11, Jadric teaches the controller is configured to: determine data of an output current of the frequency converter corresponding to the operating frequency of the controlled device and data of an efficiency of the frequency converter corresponding to the operating frequency of the controlled device by taking a plurality of preset frequencies as an operating frequency of the controlled device respectively; and determine a function of the efficiency of the frequency converter with respect to the operating frequency of the controlled device and the output current of the frequency converter according to data of the operating frequency of the controlled device, the data of the output current of the frequency converter corresponding to the operating frequency of the controlled device, and the data of the efficiency of the frequency converter corresponding to the operating frequency of the controlled device (e.g. Fig. 7: frequency vs current/torque efficiency map is generated by utilizing preset/fixed frequency and/or current/torque and/or efficiency, and mathematical relationship between them). Regarding claims 8 and 12, Geng and Jadric in combination discloses the controller is configured to: determine an input power of the frequency converter and an output power of the frequency converter corresponding to the operating frequency of the controlled device; and determine the efficiency of the frequency converter corresponding to the operating frequency of the controlled device according to the input power of the frequency converter and the output power of the frequency converter (e.g. Geng in [0035-0044] discloses relationship between efficiency and input/output power, and relationship between power, current and frequency, and Jadric: Fig. 7 discloses characteristic map of efficiency as function of current and frequency; thus, it is merely routine skill to one skilled in the art to rearrange known equations disclosed by Geng and Jadric to obtain the claimed equation). Regarding claims 9 and 13, Geng discloses the function of the efficiency of the frequency converter with respect to the operating frequency of the controlled device and the output current of the frequency converter is a quadratic function (e.g. [0041-0043]: power determined by multiplying equation of the voltage, e.g. Vd, with current, e.g. id, and the result of the equation include parameter id x id; thus, quadratic function). Claim(s) 2-4 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geng (CN 106123251 B) (hereinafter rejections rely on provided equivalent English machine translation) in view of Jadric et al. (US 8,353,174 B1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tbari et al. (US 7,521,887 B2). Regarding claims 2 and 14, Geng discloses determine the present input power of the frequency converter according to the present output power of the frequency converter and the present efficiency of the frequency converter (e.g. [0044]). Geng fails to disclose, but Tobari teaches the present output power of the frequency converter includes a present output active power of the frequency converter, and the controller is configured to determine the present output active power of the frequency converter (e.g. Col 5: active power Pc). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine active power when determine efficiency since active power is the real power consumed by the motor. Regarding claims 3 and 15, Tobari teaches the controller is configured to: determine a current of the frequency converter on a d axis and a current of the frequency converter on a q axis, the d axis being an axis in a magnetic flux direction of a magnet in the controlled device, and the q axis being an axis perpendicular to the d axis; determine a command voltage value of a frequency converter on the d axis and a command voltage value of a frequency converter on the q axis, the frequency converter being a frequency converter after amplitude limiting according to a modulation rate; and determine the present output active power of the frequency converter according to the current of the frequency converter on the d axis and the current of the frequency converter on the q axis, and the command voltage value of the frequency converter on the d axis and the command voltage value of the frequency converter on the q axis (e.g. Figs. 1 & 5 & col 5). Regarding claims 4 and 16, Tobari teaches the controller is configured to: determine the present output active power Pc of the frequency converter PNG media_image1.png 69 669 media_image1.png Greyscale where Id is the current of the frequency converter on the d axis, Ud is the command voltage value of the frequency converter on the d axis, Iq is the current of the frequency converter on the q axis, and Uq is the command voltage value of the frequency converter on the q axis (e.g. col 5 & equation 6: coefficient 3/2 is well-known in the art due to line-to-line voltage is 3 times the line-to-neutral voltage). Claim(s) 5-6 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geng (CN 106123251 B) (hereinafter rejections rely on provided equivalent English machine translation) in view of Jadric et al. (US 8,353,174 B1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhang (CN 202778717 U) (hereinafter rejections rely on provided equivalent English machine translation). Regarding claims 5 and 17, Geng fails to disclose, but Zhang teaches the present output power of the frequency converter includes a present output apparent power of the frequency converter, and the controller is configured to: determine the present output apparent power of the frequency converter and an output power factor of the frequency converter; and determine the present input power of the frequency converter according to the present efficiency of the frequency converter, the present output apparent power of the frequency converter, and the output power factor of the frequency converter (e.g. [0050-0055]: equations disclose known relationship between active power P1, reactive power Q and apparent power S, and relationship between active input power, active output power and efficiency, P1, P2 & n). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Geng with the teachings of Zhang to determine input power based on efficiency and apparent power, since it is routine skill to one skilled in the art to rearrange known equations disclosed by Zhang to obtain the claimed mathematical relationship between apparent power, input power and efficiency. Regarding claims 6 and 18, Zhang teaches the controller is configured to: determine the present input power Pr of the frequency converter according to a formula Pr =S2ixF2i, where S2i is the output power factor of the frequency a converter, F2i is the present output apparent power of the frequency converter, and a is the present efficiency of the frequency converter (e.g. [0050-0055]: routine skill to one skilled in the art to rearrange known equations disclosed by Zhang to obtain the claimed equation). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAWING CHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3909. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm. 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. /KAWING CHAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 01, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 10, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600597
METHOD OF ESTIMATING AND COMPENSATING INTERFERENCE TORQUE OF LIFTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589973
METHOD AND ELEVATOR CONTROL ARRANGEMENT FOR CONTROLLING A MAINTENANCE MODE OF AN ELEVATOR SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587124
HIGH POWER BATTERY-POWERED SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583431
Method for Managing Power Consumption of a Railway Vehicle, and Railway Vehicle With Improved Power Consumption Management
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587117
Control Device and Method for Adjusting Speed and Forward/Reverse Rotation of a Wire-Controlled Brushless Motor Power Supply During Positive/Negative Half-Cycle Phase Loss
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+12.1%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 765 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month