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
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) 1-6, 8 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tian et al. (US 2015/0194902 A1) in view of Nakamura (CN 87100351 A) (hereinafter rejections rely on provided equivalent English machine translation).
Regarding claim 1, Tian discloses an AC-DC-AC converter (e.g. Fig. 3: 2) for delivering power to an electric motor (e.g. Fig. 3: 200) from a power source (e.g. Fig. 3: 102), the AC-DC-AC converter comprising a front-end converter (e.g. Fig. 3: 70) and a motor-end converter (e.g. Fig. 3: 80) connected through a DC link (e.g. Fig. 3: 90a, 90b), the DC link voltage being generated and controlled by the front-end converter (e.g. Fig. 3).
Tian fails to disclose, but Nakamura teaches the front-end converter (e.g. Fig. 3: 2a-2f, 5a, 3a, 2g, 4, 56, 6a-6b) is configured to dynamically adjust the DC link voltage during motor startup as a function of motor frequency such that a ratio of DC link voltage to motor frequency (Vdc/f) is maintained substantially constant (e.g. Fig. 1: when motor frequency less than f3), and wherein the DC link voltage is generated by the front-end converter without an external DC-DC converter or DC-chopper connected to the DC link (e.g. Fig. 3: only AC-DC converter 2a-2f as front-end converter).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the teachings of Tian with the teachings of Nakamura to maintain Vdc/f constant during motor startup so as to minimize unnecessary voltage being provided during startup to reduce vibration.
Regarding claim 2, Tian discloses the front-end converter is a modular multilevel converter (e.g. [0001, 0032, 0033]: MMC), the motor-end converter being a hybrid modular multilevel converter (e.g. [0001, 0032, 0033]: MMC in hybrid typologies), the hybrid modular multilevel converter being configured to convert the DC link voltage into a multi-level AC voltage supplied to the motor (i.e. multiple phases).
Tian fails to explicitly discloses front-end converter is a MMC and the motor-end converter is a hybrid MMC, but Tian discloses different types of known alternative converters can be used for its invention (including MMC and hybrid MMC).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize any type of converters as the front-end converter and the motor-end converter including MMC and/or hybrid MMC in the invention of Tian since MMC and hybrid MMC are known alternative as taught by Tian, and it is merely simple substitutions of one known element with another according to KSR.
Regarding claim 3, Tian discloses the front-end converter is a hybrid modular multilevel converter, the motor-end converter being a modular multilevel converter (e.g. [0001, 0032, 0033]: MMC and/or MMC in hybrid typologies).
Tian fails to explicitly discloses front-end converter is a hybrid MMC and the motor-end converter is a MMC, but Tian discloses different types of known alternative converters can be used for its invention (including MMC and hybrid MMC).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize any type of converters as the front-end converter and the motor-end converter including MMC and/or hybrid MMC in the invention of Tian since MMC and hybrid MMC are known alternative as taught by Tian, and it is merely simple substitutions of one known element with another according to KSR.
In addition, Nakamura teaches generate the dynamically controlled DC link voltage during motor startup (e.g. Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 4, Tian discloses the front-end converter and the motor- end converter are hybrid modular multilevel converters (e.g. [0001, 0032, 0033]: MMC in hybrid typologies).
In addition, Nakamura teaches the front-end converter operating in a DC-DC conversion mode (e.g. Fig. 3: providing smoothed DC output from 3a, 5a) during startup (e.g. Fig. 1: when frequency less than f3) and in a modular multilevel converter mode during steady-state operation (e.g. Fig. 1: when frequency greater than f3).
Regarding claim 5, Nakamura teaches the front-end converter is operating so that the DC link voltage is controlled as a function of motor frequency, such that the DC link voltage decreases when the motor frequency decrease during startup (e.g. Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Nakamura teaches the front-end converter is operating so that the DC link voltage is controlled as a function of motor speed (e.g. Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, Nakamura teaches the front-end converter is operating so that the DC link voltage is controlled to a constant value during steady state operation (e.g. Fig. 1: when frequency greater than f3).
Regarding claim 26, Tian discloses the front-end converter is operating so that the DC link voltage is constant during steady state operation and variable during motor startup (e.g. Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tian et al. (US 2015/0194902 A1) in view of Nakamura (CN 87100351 A) (hereinafter rejections rely on provided equivalent English machine translation), and further in view of Dai et al. (US 2021/0036628 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Tian fails to discloses, but Dai teaches the DC link voltage is controlled as a function of motor voltage (e.g. Abstract & [0064]).
Therefore, the combination of Tian and Dai discloses the claimed invention.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify teachings of Tian to control DC voltage as a function of motor output voltage as taught by Dai, since Dai suggests it would effectively reduce DC ripple (e.g. [0004]).
Claim(s) 9 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tian et al. (US 2015/0194902 A1) in view of Nakamura (CN 87100351 A) (hereinafter rejections rely on provided equivalent English machine translation), and further in view of Liu (US 11,515,807 B1).
Regarding claim 9, Tian fails to disclose, but Liu teaches the modular multilevel converter (e.g. Fig. 1A) comprises at least one leg, each leg being connected to an AC connection and to two DC connections, each leg comprising two branches, each branch comprising at least one submodule of a plurality of submodules connected in series and an inductor connected in series, wherein a first branch comprising the first inductor is connected to a first DC connection by a submodule and to an AC connection through the first inductor, the second branch comprising the second inductor being connected to a second DC connection by a submodule and to an AC connection through the second inductor (e.g. Fig. 1A: 3 legs 104A-104C, each leg comprises upper and lower branches that connect to DC link, and have a common AC output), the submodules being configured to synthesize a multi-level AC voltage waveform supplied to the motor (i.e. to provide multi-phase voltages).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the teachings of Tian with the teachings of Liu to replace one known MMC with another, since it is merely simple substitutions of one known element with another known alternative according to KSR, and the modification would have yielded only predictable results to one skilled in the art.
Regarding claim 16, Liu teaches the modular multilevel converter comprises at least two legs, the first DC connections of the at least two legs are connected together, and the second DC connections of the at least two legs are connected together, the AC connections of the at least two legs are independent and form the phases of the AC voltage applied to the motor (e.g. Fig. 1A).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-15 and 17-25 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9, 16 and 26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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 2837
Prosecution Insights