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 § 102
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 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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KAWAI (WO 2019/039082 A1, hereinafter KAWAI).
PNG
media_image1.png
674
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, KAWAI discloses a power supply system comprising:
one or more main power source devices (See Fig.1, Item#11) configured to supply electric power to one or more load devices (See Fig.1, Items#31A-31C, disclose a plurality of loads for receiving power from the plurality of power source devices);
one or more auxiliary power source devices provided for the one or more load devices, respectively (See Fig.1, Item#41), each of the auxiliary power source devices being configured to supply electric power to corresponding one of the load devices (See Fig.1, discloses auxiliary power source 41 provides power to each of the loads 31A-31C);
a main power source circuit connected to the one or more main power source devices (See Fig.1, Items#12A and 12B, disclose converter circuit providing power to the loads 31A-31C);
an auxiliary power source circuit provided for each of the auxiliary power source devices and connected to corresponding one of the auxiliary power source devices (See Fig.1, Item#13);
a load circuit provided for each of the load devices, connected to corresponding one of the load devices (See Fig.1, Items#31A-31C, disclose a plurality of loads, it is inherent that each load comprises a circuit), and
connected to the main power source circuit and the auxiliary power source circuit at a merging point where a current flowing through the main power source circuit and a current flowing through the auxiliary power source circuit merge together (See Fig.1, discloses the main power circuit 12A and 12B and the auxiliary power circuit 13 are connected at a node with input currents Ip+Ip+Ib and an output current Ic);
a main power source current sensor configured to detect the current flowing through the main power source circuit (See Fig.1, Items#21A and 21B, disclose current sensors for detecting main power source current);
an auxiliary power source current sensor configured to detect the current flowing through the auxiliary power source circuit (See Fig.1, Item#22, discloses an auxiliary power source current sensor); and
a load current sensor configured to detect a current flowing through the load circuit (See Fig.1, Item#23).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAWAI in view of TAKAHIRO (JP2013235689 A1, hereinafter TAKAHIRO).
Regarding claim 2, KAWAI discloses the power supply system according to claim 1 as discussed above, wherein each of the main power source devices supplies electric power to a plurality of the load devices (See Fig.1, discloses main power source 11 provides power to plurality of loads 31A-31C), the main power source circuit includes a common bus configured to transmit electric power from each of the main power source devices to the plurality of load devices (See Fig.1, discloses a bus through which current IC flows to loads 31A-31C), the main power source current sensor includes a first main power source current sensor provided between each of the main power source devices and the common bus (See Fig.1, Item#21A), and a second main power source current sensor provided between the common bus and the merging point (See Fig.1, Item#21B), and
wherein the power supply system comprises one or more processors that execute computer-executable instructions stored in a memory (See Fig.1, Items#122A and 122B).
However, KAWAI does not disclose the one or more processors execute the computer-executable instructions to cause the power supply system to:
in a state where electric power is supplied from each of the main power source devices to all of the plurality of load devices, determine which of the first main power source current sensor and the second main power source current sensor has failed, based on a current detected by each of the first main power source current sensor, the second main power source current sensor, the auxiliary power source current sensor, and
the load current sensor; and
in a state where supply of electric power from each of the main power source devices to part of the plurality of load devices is stopped, determine which of the auxiliary power source current sensor and the load current sensor has failed, based on the current detected by each of the first main power source current sensor, the second main power source current sensor, the auxiliary power source current sensor, and the load current sensor.
TAKAHIRO discloses a vehicle power architecture comprising a plurality of current sensors, further comprising an abnormality detecting unit for detecting an abnormality with a current sensor (See Par.10).
KAWAI and TAKAHIRO are analogous art since they both deal with power supply circuits.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by KAWAI, with the teachings of TAKAHIRO by adding the abnormality detection of the current sensors for the benefit of protecting the power supply circuit by ensuring the current sensors are operational and alerting the user when a current sensor abnormality is detected.
However, KAWAI and TAKAHIRO do not disclose in a state where electric power is supplied from each of the main power source devices to all of the plurality of load devices, determine which of the first main power source current sensor and the second main power source current sensor has failed, based on a current detected by each of the first main power source current sensor, the second main power source current sensor, the auxiliary power source current sensor, and
the load current sensor; and
in a state where supply of electric power from each of the main power source devices to part of the plurality of load devices is stopped, determine which of the auxiliary power source current sensor and the load current sensor has failed, based on the current detected by each of the first main power source current sensor, the second main power source current sensor, the auxiliary power source current sensor, and the load current sensor.
The examiner however explains that the above limitations are interpreted as using Kirchhoff’s current law which states that the total current flowing into a junction (node) in an electrical circuit must equal the total current flowing out of that junction. Applying Kirschoff’s current law to KAWAI, The currents Ip+Ip +Ib= Ic, when the currents are not equal this means there is a current sensor malfunction. When the second circuit 12B is inactive then Ip+Ib=Ic, if the two sides are unequal then a current sensor error is present.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by KAWAI and TAKAHIRO with the teachings of Kirchhoff’s law for the benefit of providing a simplified current sensor abnormality detection system.
Regarding claim 4, KAWAI and TAKAHIRO the power supply system according to claim 2 as discussed above, wherein when the supply of the electric power to the part of the load devices is stopped, the one or more processors cause the power supply system to increase output power of another part of the plurality of load devices, as compared with a case where the electric power is supplied to the part of the load devices (See KAWAI, Par.48, discloses a dynamic adjustment of the output current to the loads based on fluctuation of the loads. The examiner interprets this to mean that when one of the loads drop and another load requests an increase in the power. The system adjust the output to provide more power to the second load since there is additional power to be provided).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KAWAI in view of TAKAHIRO and in further view of YAMAGUCHI et al. (US 2022/0094178 A1, hereinafter YAMAGUCHI).
Regarding claim 3, KAWAI and TAKAHIRO disclose the power supply system according to claim 2 as discussed above, wherein each of the auxiliary power source devices includes a battery (See KAWAI, Fig.1, Item#41 and Par.19, disclose a lithium-ion battery).
However, KAWAI and TAKAHIRO do not disclose the one or more processors cause the power supply system to monitor a state of charge of the battery and stop the supply of the electric power to the part of the load devices when the state of charge of the battery of each of the auxiliary power source devices corresponding to the part of the load devices is less than a predetermined value.
YAMAGUCHI discloses a power supply comprising a battery and a processor, the processor causes the power supply system to monitor a state of charge of the battery and stop the supply of the electric power to the part of the load devices when the state of charge of the battery of each of the auxiliary power source devices corresponding to the part of the load devices is less than a predetermined value (See Fig.1, discloses a control unit 53 which receives cell voltage from the battery 55 and Fig.4, Step#S4 and S7 and Par.42, disclose prohibiting discharging when at least one cell voltage is below a threshold) .
KAWAI, TAKAHIRO and YAMAGUCHI are analogous art since they all deal with power circuits.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by KAWAI and TAKAHIRO with the teachings of YAMAGUCHI by adding over discharge protection for the benefit of protecting the battery against damage caused by being over discharged.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED H OMAR whose telephone number is (571)270-7165. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am -7:00 PM EST.
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.
/AHMED H OMAR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859