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 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(s) 1-3, 5-12, 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philippart (US 2013/0162183) in view of Kolbe (US 20180076642).
Re Claim 1; Philippart discloses a circuit for reforming electrolytic capacitors, the circuit comprising.
an electrolytic capacitor: Paragraph [0024] discloses electrolytic capacitor 228 used in the TCM to drive an electric motor.
a primary switch operable to selectively couple a power supply to the electrolytic capacitor: Paragraph [0028, Fig. 2] describes second switching device 252, which connects the battery (power supply) directly to the capacitor (228) when closed. This is the primary switch.
a reforming switch in series with a resistor, wherein a combination of the reforming switch and the resistor is in parallel with the primary switch: Paragraphs [0027]–[0028] and Fig. 2 describe first switching device 220 in series with current-limiting resistor 224. This path is parallel to the second switching device 252, forming the reforming path.
a controller that is configured to: initiate a reforming process, wherein the primary switch is disabled: Paragraph [0035] explains that reformation begins with second switching device 252 (primary switch) open and first switching device 220 (reforming switch) closed.
provide a signal to one or more reforming switches to control the one or more reforming switches: Paragraph [0027] states that switching control module 216 controls switching of device 220.
completing the reforming process based at least in part on a detection of a voltage of the electrolytic capacitor or a duration of time: Paragraph [0038] teaches that reformation is complete when the voltage difference between the battery and the capacitor is less than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 2V).
responsive to completing the reforming process, disabling the one or more reforming switches: Paragraph [0039] explains that once reformation is complete, the first switching device 220 is opened (disabled), and the second switching device 252 is closed to allow normal operation.
a single reforming path with a switch and resistor (paragraphs [0027]–[0028]) but does not disclose multiple parallel branches.
Philippart does not disclose a plurality of branches arranged in parallel, wherein each branch of the plurality of branches comprises a reforming switch in series with a resistor, and wherein the plurality of branches is in parallel with the primary switch
Kolbe discusses modular converter architectures and scalable reformation circuits, where multiple branches can be implemented to control current distribution, each with a switch and resistor (paragraphs [0014], [0026]). Kolber also discloses a plurality of branches arranged in parallel, wherein each branch of the plurality of branches comprises a reforming switch in series with a resistor, and wherein the plurality of branches is in parallel with the primary switch. (Fig. 1 discloses comprises a precharging circuit 29, which is used to precharge the intermediate circuit capacitor 24 to the required DC voltage level before connecting the frequency inverter 14 to the grid 2, to avoid high transient switch-on currents, which could otherwise result in the discharging of the intermediate circuit capacitor 24. The precharge circuit is in parallel with the primary switch.
Fig .2 shows the detailed of the precharging circuit to include a plurality of branches arranged in parallel, wherein each branch of the plurality of branches comprises a reforming switch in series with a resistor. See par 0050-52)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporate Kolbe’s modular branching into Philippart’s design to scale for higher capacitance systems or to allow finer control over reformation current.
Re Claim 10; Philippart discloses
disabling a primary switch, wherein the primary switch selectively couples a power supply to the electrolytic capacitor: Paragraph [0035] describes that the second switching device 252 (the primary switch) is maintained in an open state during the reformation process. This switch normally connects the battery (power supply) directly to the electrolytic capacitor 228, and disabling it ensures current flows only through the reforming path.
providing a signal to one or more reforming switches to control the one or more reforming switches: Paragraph [0027] explains that the switching control module 216 controls the first switching device 220, which is used to initiate and regulate the reformation current. The control module sends a signal to transition the switch to a closed state, allowing current to flow through the current-limiting resistor 224.
completing the reforming process based at least in part on a detection of a voltage of the electrolytic capacitor or a duration of time: Paragraph [0038] teaches that the switching control module 216 determines when reformation is complete by comparing the voltage of the electrolytic capacitor 228 to the voltage of the battery 126. Reformation is deemed complete when the voltage difference is less than a predetermined threshold (e.g., 2V). Alternatively, paragraph [0037] discusses using leakage current thresholds to determine completion, which indirectly reflects elapsed time and capacitor health.
responsive to completing the reforming process, disabling the one or more switches: Paragraph [0039] describes that once reformation is complete, the switching control module 216 transitions the first switching device 220 (reforming switch) to the open state, effectively disabling it. This prevents further current flow through the reformation path and prepares the system for normal operation.
a single reforming path with a switch and resistor (paragraphs [0027]–[0028]) but does not disclose multiple parallel branches.
Philippart does not disclose a plurality of branches arranged in parallel, wherein each branch of the plurality of branches comprises a reforming switch in series with a resistor, and wherein the plurality of branches is in parallel with the primary switch
Kolbe discusses modular converter architectures and scalable reformation circuits, where multiple branches can be implemented to control current distribution, each with a switch and resistor (paragraphs [0014], [0026]). Kolber also discloses a plurality of branches arranged in parallel, wherein each branch of the plurality of branches comprises a reforming switch in series with a resistor, and wherein the plurality of branches is in parallel with the primary switch. (Fig. 1 discloses comprises a precharging circuit 29, which is used to precharge the intermediate circuit capacitor 24 to the required DC voltage level before connecting the frequency inverter 14 to the grid 2, to avoid high transient switch-on currents, which could otherwise result in the discharging of the intermediate circuit capacitor 24. the precharge circuit is in parallel with the primary switch.
Fig .2 shows the detailed of the precharging circuit to include a plurality of branches arranged in parallel, wherein each branch of the plurality of branches comprises a reforming switch in series with a resistor. See par 0050-52)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporate Kolbe’s modular branching into Philippart’s design to scale for higher capacitance systems or to allow finer control over reformation current.
Re Claims 2 and 11; Philippart teaches a controller that monitors the voltage of the electrolytic capacitor and determines when reformation is complete based on the voltage difference between the capacitor and the battery (paragraph [0038]).
However, Philippart does not explicitly disclose maintaining the voltage at multiple thresholds for defined time intervals.
Kolbe teaches a staged reformation process in which the voltage of the electrolytic capacitor is maintained at a first threshold for a first interval of time and then at a higher subsequent threshold for a subsequent interval (paragraphs [0025]–[0026]). This is done to gradually rebuild the oxide layer and minimize stress on the capacitor.
Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would combine Kolbe’s staged voltage control with Philippart’s reformation logic to improve capacitor longevity and thermal regulation, as Kolbe explains that gradual voltage increases reduce stress and optimize reformation.
Re Claim 3 and 12; Philippart disclosure has been discussed above.
Philippart does not disclose repeated voltage threshold increases.
Kolbe teaches a reformation curve where the voltage is increased incrementally and held at each level for a defined interval (paragraphs [0025]– [0026]). This process continues until the full reformation duration is reached.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have integrated Kolbe’s voltage-stepping method into Philippart’s system allows for more precise reformation aligned with capacitor manufacturer specifications, improving reliability and reducing failure risk.
Re Claim 5 and 14 Philippart teaches further comprising a voltage sensor, wherein the voltage sensor is configured to sense a voltage of the electrolytic capacitor and provide the voltage to the controller. (paragraph [0038]), implying the presence of a voltage sensor that provides input to the controller.
Re Claims 6 and 15 Philippart teaches wherein the controller is further configured to monitor the voltage signal of the electrolytic capacitor. ( Philippart teaches that the switching control module monitors capacitor voltage to determine when reformation is complete (paragraph [0038]).)
Re Claims 7 and 16; Philippart teaches wherein the controller is further configured to modulate switching of the one or more reforming switches based on the monitoring the voltage signal. (Philippart teaches modulating the reforming switch using pulse-width modulation (PWM) based on leakage current, which is indirectly related to voltage (paragraph [0036]).)
Kolbe teaches clocking the switching device to follow a reformation voltage curve (paragraphs [0024]– [0025]), implying modulation based on voltage.
Combining Kolbe’s voltage-based modulation with Philippart’s PWM control enables adaptive reformation based on real-time capacitor conditions.
Re Claim 8 and 17; Philippart teaches, wherein the controller is further configured to switch a next reforming switch of the one or more reforming switches based at least in part an expiration of a time.
Philippart does not disclose switching between multiple reforming switches.
Kolbe teaches staged reformation with time-based progression between voltage levels (paragraphs [0025]– [0026]), which implies switching reforming paths or states based on time.
One of ordinary skill would use Kolbe’s time-based progression to sequence reforming switches in Philippart’s system for better control and scalability.
Re Claim 9 and 18; Philippart teaches wherein the primary switch and the one or more reforming switches are at least one of a relay, a contactor, or a switching device. (Philippart teaches that the switching devices may be transistors or relays (paragraphs [0027], [0028]).)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that there is nowhere that Kolbe discloses multiple branches and there is nowhere indicated in Kolbe that an alternative reforming arrangement may be possible. Therefore, even of the skilled person would have combined Phillippart and Kolbe, the element of claim 1 will not result.
Applicant further argues that reforming circuit in Fig. 2 receives a three-phase power from grid 2 and requires three phase precharging resistor 32 and three rectifier path 33. Duplicating this circuitry to provide parallel branches would result in a large component and would certainly not be logical or reasonable modification by one of the ordinary skilled in the art.
However, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Philippart discloses a single reforming path with a switch and resistor (paragraphs [0027]–[0028]) but does not disclose multiple parallel branches.
Philippart does not disclose a plurality of branches arranged in parallel, wherein each branch of the plurality of branches comprises a reforming switch in series with a resistor, and wherein the plurality of branches is in parallel with the primary switch
Kolbe discusses modular converter architectures and scalable reformation circuits, where multiple branches can be implemented to control current distribution, each with a switch and resistor (paragraphs [0014], [0026]). Kolber also discloses a plurality of branches arranged in parallel, wherein each branch of the plurality of branches comprises a reforming switch in series with a resistor, and wherein the plurality of branches is in parallel with the primary switch. (Fig. 1 discloses comprises a precharging circuit 29, which is used to precharge the intermediate circuit capacitor 24 to the required DC voltage level before connecting the frequency inverter 14 to the grid 2, to avoid high transient switch-on currents, which could otherwise result in the discharging of the intermediate circuit capacitor 24. the precharge circuit is in parallel with the primary switch.
Fig .2 shows the detailed of the precharging circuit to include a plurality of branches arranged in parallel, wherein each branch of the plurality of branches comprises a reforming switch in series with a resistor. See par 0050-52 “[0052] The precharging circuit 29 is shown in greater detail in FIG. 2” emphasis added)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporate Kolbe’s modular branching into Philippart’s design to scale for higher capacitance systems or to allow finer control over reformation current.
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 DANIEL KESSIE whose telephone number is (571)272-4449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pmEst.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (571) 272-7492. 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.
/DANIEL KESSIE/
03/23/2026
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836