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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement (see page 1 of the specification). 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “first bank and a second bank of series connected switches a interconnected in between an input voltage terminal and a reference terminal in a series connection” (claim 1, lines 2-4), “ a plurality of switched capacitors (SCs) having a first terminal interconnected between two adjacent switches of the first bank and a second capacitor terminal interconnected between two adjacent switches of the second bank” (claim 1, lines 5-8), and the plurality of switch pairs being switched as recited (claim 1, lines 9-14) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The block diagram shown in Fig. 1 does not show the specific claimed connections and arrangement of the components recited in the claims. These claimed features should be shown in a circuit diagram and timing diagram in order to help facilitate a proper understanding of the claimed invention.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In the beginning of line 1, --a-- should be inserted before “first bank”.
At the end of line 1, “a” (second occurrence) should be deleted or replaced with --are--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-6 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 1 recites the limitation "the plurality of switch pairs" in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1, lines 9-11, recites “a controller having a first frequency by controlling the plurality of switch pairs such that each switch pair is switched at staggered times relating to other plurality of switch pairs during a periodic switching cycle”. This seems to imply that the periodic switching cycle is created, controlled, or determined by the first frequency. However, lines 13-14 recite “the periodic switching cycle has a second frequency that is higher than the first frequency.” It is unclear how the periodic switching cycle can have a second frequency higher than the first frequency if the first frequency is used to create the periodic switching cycle. This renders the claim indefinite. For examination purposes, the examiner will interpret the claim as requiring that some of the switch pairs are controlled at a first frequency and other of the switch pairs are controlled at a second frequency that is higher than the first frequency.
Claims 2-6, recite multiple terms that do not appear to be common terms in the art and are not described or defined in the specification so as to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the scope of these terms. Thus, these terms render the claims indefinite. While applicant may be their own lexicographer, the scope of the claims must be clear to one of ordinary skill in the art, when the claims are interpreted in view of the specification. The terms in question are: “multicarrier beat width balance pulse width modulation method” (claim 2, lines 2-3); “the high move forward voltage level” (claim 3, lines 2-3); “the pressure voltage of the switches” (claim 4, lines 1-2); “OK all out symphonious bending (THD) at various burdens” (claim 5, lines 2-3); and “the exchanging pressure across each switch” (claim 6, line 3).
The term “high” in claim 3 (see line 1) is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the claim limitation “the high move forward voltage level” renders the claim indefinite.
The term “enormously decreased” in claim 4 (see line 3) is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “enormously decreased” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the claim limitation “the complete standing voltage of the inverter is enormously decreased without H-spans” renders the claim indefinite.
The terms “low PIV, TSV”, “high ability to help”, and “less detached parts” in claim 5 (see lines 3-4) are relative terms which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “low PIV, TSV”, “high ability to help”, and “less detached parts” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the claim limitations “low PIV, TSV”, “high ability to help”, and “less detached parts” render the claim indefinite.
Regarding claim 6, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Thus, it is unclear if the claim requires the input DC to be 50V or if this an optional voltage level. This renders the claim indefinite. For examination purposes, the claim will be interpreted as not requiring 50V.
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)(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) 1, 3, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoscovich et al (US 10,886,832 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Yoscovich et al teaches: An electric vehicle hybrid charging system (the preamble recitation of “electric vehicle hybrid charging” is being interpreted as intended use, since the body of the claim stands alone and does not refer back to the preamble, the system of Yoscovich et al is capable of performing the intended use), the system comprises (see Fig. 10): first bank (S1M-S6M) and a second bank (S1N-S6N) of series connected switches are interconnected in between an input voltage terminal (Vdc+) and a reference voltage terminal (Vdc-) in a series connection; a plurality of switched capacitors (C42, C43, C44) having a first terminal interconnected between two adjacent switches of the first bank and a second capacitor terminal interconnected between two adjacent switches of the second bank (see the terminal connections shown in Fig. 10); and a controller (not shown in Fig. 10, see para. having a first frequency by controlling the plurality of switch pairs such that each switch pair is switched at staggered times (see col. 2, lines 10-11 and Fig. 2B) relating to other plurality of switch pairs during a periodic switching cycle, wherein each switch pair consists of a switch from the first bank and a switch from the second bank, and the periodic switching cycle has a second frequency that is higher than the first frequency (see the high and low frequencies discussed in col. 13, lines 17-51).
Regarding claim 3, Yoscovich et al teaches: The system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the voltage level (the output of the inverter or inverter stage) is accomplished by the charging and releasing course of the SC (see Figs. 2B & 2C, the opening and closing of the switches allows the capacitors to charge & discharge).
Regarding claim 6, Yoscovich et al teaches: The system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the switches are configured to endure the voltage during the turn-on and switch off processes and the voltage across each switch is equivalent to applied input DC (the switches are selected in order to handle the expected voltages in the system during switch turn-on and turn-off, and the voltage across each switch is equivalent to the applied input DC voltage levels, see Fig. 10).
Note: Due to the rejections under 112(b) noted above, the lack of a prior art rejection on claims 2, 4, and 5 should not be interpreted as an indication of allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Liu (US 12,081,119 B2) teaches PFM mode operation of switched capacitor converters.
Riar et al (US 11,626,811 B2) teaches a multi-level modular converter.
Elfman (US 11,205,916 B2) teaches a high-energy capacitive transform device using multiple banks of capacitors.
Manjrekar (US 10,141,866 B2) teaches a multi-level inverter using first and second switch banks.
Perreault et al (US 9,762,145 B2) teaches a stacked switched capacitor energy buffer circuit.
Gong et al (CN 1022529 C) teaches a high-frequency switch capacitor inverter.
Masahito et al (JP H10201241 A) teaches a power converter using switched capacitors.
Akihiro et al (JP 2020127300 A) teaches a vehicle power supply including capacitors and switches.
Please also see the additional references cited on the attached PTO-892, which are related to power circuits including capacitors and switches.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jared Fureman whose telephone number is (571)272-2391. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/JARED FUREMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859