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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Fig. 4) in the reply filed on 10/20/2025 is acknowledged.
In response, Examiner has identified claims which do not correspond to the disclosed structure of the elected species. Therefore, claims 6 and 12-15 are Withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, ln 7: “auxilar winding” should read –auxiliary winding--. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-3, 7-8, 10-11, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dajaku et al. (US 2016/0049838).
In claim 1, Dajaku discloses a self-excited brushless machine with compensated field windings (Fig. 1-11), the machine comprising: a rotor (2) comprising: a field winding (6) secured to the rotor (2); an auxiliary winding (3) secured to the rotor (2); and an energy converter (4) associated with the rotor (2) and configured to convert current between the field winding (6) and the auxiliary winding (3); and a stator (1) comprising a multiphase winding ([0048]).
In claim 2, Dajaku discloses wherein the energy converter (4) is configured to convert AC current induced in an auxiliary winding to DC current ([0050-0055]; see NOTE).
NOTE: A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
In claim 3, Dajaku discloses wherein the energy converter (4) is configured to convert a first AC current induced in an auxiliary winding to a second AC current having a different magnitude and frequency ([0050-0055]; see NOTE).
NOTE: A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
In claim 7, Dajaku discloses wherein the rotor comprises: a rectifier (4); an auxiliary winding (3) electrically coupled to the rectifier (4); and a field winding (6) electrically coupled to the rectifier (4).
In claim 8, Dajaku discloses wherein: the field winding (6) is a single-phase winding that serves as a synchronous machine field winding (6; [0071-0073]); and the auxiliary winding (3) is configured for power transfer from the stator (1) to the rotor (2).
In claim 10, Dajaku discloses wherein the auxiliary winding (3) is a single-phase winding (E; Fig. 1-2, and 5).
In claim 11, Dajaku discloses wherein the rotor (2) and the stator (1) have radial geometry (Fig. 4).
In claim 16, Dajaku discloses (Fig. 1-11) a method of operating a machine, the method comprising: using a first current (Alternating Current) to generate a first magnetomotive force on a stator (1) of the machine; using a second current (Direct Current) to generate a second magnetomotive force; inducing a third current (Induced Current) on auxiliary windings (3) of a rotor of the machine using the second magnetomotive force; and exciting a rotor field winding (6) of the machine with the induced currents of the auxiliary windings (3; [0034, 0050-0055, 0060]).
In claim 17, Dajaku discloses wherein the rotor (2) comprises an energy converter (4).
In claim 18, Dajaku discloses wherein the energy converter (4) converts AC current induced in the auxiliary winding to DC current ([0050-0055]).
In claim 19, Yamada discloses wherein the energy converter (4) converts a first AC current the auxiliary winding to a second AC current having a different magnitude and frequency ([0050-0055]).
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.
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) 4 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dajaku et al. (US 2016/0049838) in view of Kuznetsov et al. (US 2019/0393754).
In claim 4, Dajaku teaches the machine of claim 1, with the exception of wherein the energy converter comprises an active AC/AC converter.
However, Kuznetsov teaches wherein an energy converter comprises an active AC/AC converter (C1 106) to provide excitation of a rotor circuit at a different frequency and power level ([0026]).
Therefore in view of Kuznetsov, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to provide an energy storage system application for the machine (Kuznetov; [0026]).
In claim 20, Dajaku teaches the machine of claim 16, with the exception of wherein the energy converter comprises an active AC/AC converter.
However, Kuznetsov teaches wherein an energy converter comprises an active AC/AC converter (C1 106) to provide excitation of a rotor circuit at a different frequency and power level ([0026]).
Therefore in view of Kuznetsov, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to provide an energy storage system application for the machine (Kuznetov; [0026]).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dajaku et al. (US 2016/0049838) in view of Kuznetsov et al. (US 2019/0393754), and further in view of Jackson et al. (US 2013/0332014).
In claim 5, Dajaku as modified teaches the machine of claim 4, with the exception of wherein the energy converter comprises a wireless transmission interface that controls switching gate commands.
However, Jackson teaches wherein energy converter comprises a wireless transmission interface that controls switching gate commands (via the use of a controller [0066]).
Therefore in view of Jackson, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to provide to manage and distribute power to the other components of the machine (Jackson; [0066]).
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dajaku et al. (US 2016/0049838) in view of Yamada et al. (US 2014/0028160).
In claim 9, Dajaku teaches the machine of claim 8, with the exception of wherein the auxiliary winding is a multiphase winding.
However, Yamada teaches (Fig. 2) an auxiliary winding (42n, 42s) having multiphase windings (A-Phase and B-Phase).
Therefore in view of Yamada, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have arrived at the claimed invention, in order to produce magnetic characteristics in the pole of each rotor tooth to create electromotive forces which are produced on the windings (Yamada; [0061]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yamada et al. (US 2014/0028160) teaches a stator having a stator core, and stator windings wound around either the stator core or teeth of the stator.
Roche et al. (US 4233555) teaches stator windings of a dynamo electric machine including three phase and single phase output windings for generating alternating current output power at different voltages
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHAD H JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1231. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at 571-272-3560. 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.
RASHAD H. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2834
/RASHAD H JOHNSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2834