DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the application filed on 2/27/2023.
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 10-15 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. Regarding claim 10, it’s not clear as if the limitation “the power cable” is the same or different from the limitation “DC cable”. Furthermore, the limitation “the power cable” lacks proper antecedent basis and should be written as “a power cable”. Dependent claims 11-15 inherit the deficiencies of independent claim 10 and are therefore also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b). Further regarding claim 14, it’s not clear as if the limitation “the DC power cable” is the same or different from the limitations “DC cable” or “the power cable” mentioned in independent claim 10, which claim 14 depends from. Furthermore, the limitation “the DC power cable” lacks proper antecedent basis and should be written as “a DC power cable”.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostakis et al. (US Patent 10812664) in view of Lun Li e al. (US Patent 9728983). Regarding claim 1, Kostakis et al. discloses (see fig. 3-6) a power conversion system (110/210) coupled to a power supply (connection to 102/107) that supplies power over a power cable (132) connected to remote radio heads (122), the power conversion system comprising: an input that receives input power from the power supply (input to 110 connected output from power supply 102/107), and an output (214) coupled to the power cable (214 connection to 132); a control module (248) configured to monitor power information (power information being feedback into 248), the power information including a resistance of the power cable (operation of 248); and one or more DC-DC converters (210) coupled to the control module (210 connection to 248) and configured to generate a output voltage at the output (output at 214 from 210), the output voltage generated by adding to the input voltage, a supplemental voltage determined from the monitored power information to compensate for a voltage decrease on the power cable (see Abstract which states “The voltage control system calculates a voltage drop on the DC cable based on the V.sub.RRH measurement and then adds different voltage steps to V.sub.IN so V.sub.OUT compensates for the voltage drop”). Kostakis et al. does not disclose that the power information includes a current measurement of the input power. Lun Li et al. discloses (see fig. 1B-2) that power information includes a current measurement of an input power (operation of 60. See steps S225, S230, S235). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Kostakis et al. to include the features of Lun Li et al. because it provides for a control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 2, Kostakis et al. discloses (see fig. 3-6) that the power information further includes: a top voltage at an input to the RRHs (operation of 230), and a target voltage at a power input of the RRHs (target voltage level at input of RRH, see claim 20). Regarding claim 3, Kostakis et al. discloses (see fig. 3-6) the control module (248) is further configured to use at least a portion of the power information determine a voltage drop on a DC cables (operation of 248 determining voltage drop of cables 132) and to signal the one or more DC-DC converters to adjust the output voltage of the one or more DC-DC converters to compensate for any input voltage decrease to maintain the input voltage at the RRHs at a relative constant level (see Abstract which states “The voltage control system calculates a voltage drop on the DC cable based on the V.sub.RRH measurement and then adds different voltage steps to V.sub.IN so V.sub.OUT compensates for the voltage drop”). Regarding claim 4, Kostakis et al. discloses (see fig. 3-6) adjusting the output voltage (Vout) further comprises: adding to an input voltage of the input power, a supplemental voltage (see Abstract which states “The voltage control system calculates a voltage drop on the DC cable based on the V.sub.RRH measurement and then adds different voltage steps to V.sub.IN so V.sub.OUT compensates for the voltage drop”). Regarding claim 6, Kostakis et al. discloses (see fig. 3-6) that the resistance of the power cable (132) is determined by calculating a resistance of each DC circuit in the power cable (resistance in 132. See column 4 lines 31-42, which states that DC circuit and DC cable is interchangeable) based on the top voltage at the RRHs and the output voltage (see column 4 lines 31-42). Kostakis et al. does not disclose calculating a resistance is based on the current measurements of the input power. Lun Li et al. discloses (see fig. 1B-2) calculating a resistance is based on the current measurements of the input power (operation of 60. See steps S225, S230, S235). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Kostakis et al. to include the features of Lun Li et al. because it provides for a control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 8, Kostakis et al. discloses (see fig. 15) an enclosure (rack mount unit) that has slots to receive at least one pluggable module containing the one or more of one or more DC-DC converters (plugabble dc/dc converter plugged into slot of rack mount unit).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostakis et al. (US Patent 10812664) in view of Lun Li e al. (US Patent 9728983) and Guerin et al. (US 2021/0072779). Regarding claim 7, Kostakis et al. does not disclose that the resistance of the power cable is determined by receiving resistance information that is input by a user. Guerin et al. discloses that a resistance of a power cable is determined by receiving resistance information that is input by a user (see paragraph 0014-0015). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Kostakis et al. to include the features of Guerin et al. because it provides for a control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostakis et al. (US Patent 10812664) in view of Lun Li e al. (US Patent 9728983) and Su et al. (US 2017/0339799). Regarding claim 9, Kostakis et al. does not disclose that the power conversion system is implemented in a 2U rack configuration. Su et al. discloses (see fig. 2-3) that a power conversion system is implemented in a 2U rack configuration (see 2u configuration shown in figs. 2-3). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Kostakis et al. to include the features of Su et al. because it allows for a specific design choice, which can provide a reduction in component variance, thus increasing operational efficiencies.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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.
Claim 10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 11-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Chamberlain et al. (US Patent 11275395) discloses a programmable power supply with cable resistance detection. Winkler et al. (US Patent 10830803) discloses methods and equipment for reducing power loss in cellular systems
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY A GBLENDE whose telephone number is (571)270-5472. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Monica Lewis can be reached at 571-272-1838. 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.
/JEFFREY A GBLENDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838