Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/197,539

SEVEN-SWITCH INDIRECT MATRIX CONVERTER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 15, 2023
Examiner
DIAO, M BAYE
Art Unit
2859
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
1247 granted / 1424 resolved
+19.6% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1464
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.5%
-34.5% vs TC avg
§103
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1424 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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. Acknowledgement is made of application #18/197,539 filed on 05/15/2023 in which claims 1-9 have been presented for prosecution in a first action on the merits. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 0 3 / 1 2 /20 2 4 has been considered and placed of record. An initialed copy is attached herewith . Claim Objections Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 3, the limitations of, ”… wherein the bidirectional switches include …” should and would read for examination purpose --… wherein the bidirectional switches include …-- . 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- 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Asa et al., (Asa) US 2021/0188106 A1 . Regarding claim 1: Asa at least discloses and shows in Fig. 1: A direct current (DC) fast charger (see Fig. 1) for charging batteries of electric vehicles (EVs), comprising: a primary circuit (118,116,111) , including seven bidirectional switches (S1 to S4 in Fig. 9; Figs. 14C/D show more than 7 switches; see [0248]) , electrically linked to a primary wire (primary coil of transmitter 112 or Lp ; see [0196]) of a transformer (see transmitter112/receiver 122 with coupling coefficient k; see [0437]) and configured to receive alternating current (AC) (VAC; element 50) power from a power grid (see [0197]) ; a secondary circuit (120 ,130 ) electrically linked to a secondary wire (Ls or receiver coil 122) ([0055],[0195] and [0299]) of the transformer for converting AC power into DC power (note element circuit 130 include a full bridge rectifier with the diodes D1,D2,D3 and D4 that convert AC to DC; see Figs. 9,48A/B, [0218]-[0219] , [0289] and [0299]) ; and a control system ( [0012]-[0014],[0198]-[0199], [0223],[0405], Figs. 52A/B)(note- the control system changes/modulates the frequency of the AC input voltage as seen in Figs. 52A/B) , electrically linked to the primary circuit and the secondary circuit, that changes the frequency of the AC power received from the power grid in five switch state changes (see [0223],[0405] and Figs. 52A/B) . Regarding claim 3, Asa discloses all the claimed invention as set forth and discussed above in claim 1 . Asa further discloses, wherein the bidirectional switches include an A side MOSFET and a B side MOSFET (see annotated Fig. 14C below and [0203] ) . Regarding claim 4, Asa discloses all the claimed invention as set forth and discussed above in claim 1. Asa further discloses , wherein at least one switch conductivity change is made absent the presence of electrical current (see Fig. 7, note in absence of current SW 2,C =0 while SW 2,V is >0 while when SW 2,C is reversed (negative current) SW 2,V is kept at zero). Regarding claim 6, Asa discloses all the claimed invention as set forth and discussed above in claim 1 . Asa further discloses, wherein two switch conductivity changes are made in the presence of electrical current (see [0219],[0237] see Fig. 10B) Regarding claim 7, Asa discloses all the claimed invention as set forth and discussed above in claim 1 . Asa further discloses, wherein the primary circuit (118,116,111) receives AC power from and provides AC power to the power grid (50) via bidirectional power flow (see bidirectional switches configuration in Fig. 14C; see[0083],[0314] and Figs. 52A-B) [0227],[0228],[0229],[0234]-[0235] ) . Regarding claim 8, Asa discloses all the claimed invention as set forth and discussed above in claim 1 . Asa further discloses , wherein the primary circuit changes a power factor to be leading unit ([0028]) , and lagging (note- due to the fact that the current in an inductor lags the voltage and the current in a capacitor lead s the voltage as shown in Figs. 48A or 53 right-side includes an inductor and a capacitor L 22 and C 2 2 ) (see [0261],[0263]) . Regarding claim 9, Asa discloses all the claimed invention as set forth and discussed above in claim 1 . Asa further discloses , wherein the primary circuit uses the primary wire of the transformer as a leakage inductor (see [0213,[0301] and [0344]). 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) 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asa et al., (Asa) US 2021/0188106 A1 in view of Wang et al., (“ A Seven -Switch Five-Level Active-Neutral-Point-Clamped Converter and Its Optimal Modulation Strategy”)(cited by applicants) Regarding claim 4, Asa discloses all the claimed invention as set forth and discussed above in claim 1. Asa does not expressly teach, wherein at least one switch conductivity change is made absent the presence of electrical current (although Fig. 7, note in absence of current SW 2,C =0 while SW 2,V is >0 while when SW 2,C is reversed (negative current) SW 2,V is kept at zero). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wang with Asa, by having, wherein at least one switch conductivity change is made absent the presence of electrical current, as recited, in order provide a further reduction of system cost, as per the teachings of Wang (page 5148, lines 1-2). However , Wang teaches and shows in Table I, page 5148 factual evidence of, wherein at least one switch conductivity change is made absent the presence of electrical current (note when T1 is 0 in switching states C and D while the conductivity of switches T2 and T3 changes from high (1) to low(0) and respectively from low(0) to high(1) as shown in table 1). Regarding claim 5, Asa discloses all the claimed invention as set forth and discussed above in claim 1. Asa does not expressly teach, wherein three switch conductivity changes are made absent the presence of electrical current. However, Wang teaches and shows in Table I, page 5148 factual evidence of, wherein three switch conductivity changes (switches T2,T3 and T6 respectively change conductivity from switching states C to F as (1 to 0, from 0 to 1 and respectively from 1 to 0 as shown in ) are made absent the presence of electrical current . It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wang with Asa, by having, wherein three switch conductivity changes are made absent the presence of electrical current , as recited, in order provide a further reduction of system cost, as per the teachings of Wang (page 5148, lines 1-2). Regarding claim 6, Asa discloses all the claimed invention as set forth and discussed above in claim 1 . While Asa disc usses , wherein two switch conductivity changes are made in the presence of electrical current (see [0219],[0237] see Fig. 10B). Wang teaches and shows in table I factual evidence of, wherein two switch conductivity changes are made in the presence of electrical current (note switching states A and B while T1 is high which indicates the presence of current, switches T2 and respectively T3 change from 1 to 0 and respectively from 0 to 1; see table I). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wang with Asa, by having, wherein two switch conductivity changes are made in the presence of electrical current , as recited, in order provide a further reduction of system cost, as per the teachings of Wang (page 5148, lines 1-2). The motivation for doing so is that in contrast to the conventional 5L-ANPC inverters which need eight active switches and other types of five-level inverters which require more devices, the proposed 7S-5L-ANPC inverter only requires seven active switches and two discrete diodes , as per the teachings of Wang (page 5148, lines 3-8) . Accordingly claim 6 would have been obvious. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 2 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. Regarding claim 2, patentability exists at least in part with the claimed limitations of, “… wherein the switch states are determined using dual gate pulse width modulation from a synchronous negative or positive vector and a modulated sine triangle pulse width modulation signal processed from AC phase voltages compared to requested active and reactive power ” . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT M'BAYE DIAO whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6127 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F; 10:00AM-6:30PM and OFF most of the time Friday when working IFP . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT TAELOR KIM can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-7166 . 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT M'BAYE DIAO Primary Examiner Art Unit 2859 /M BAYE DIAO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 February 17, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 15, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600265
POWER SUPPLY DEVICE, ELECTRIC VEHICLE PROVIDED WITH POWER SUPPLY DEVICE, AND POWER STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601790
Battery Parameter Estimation Apparatus and Method
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600258
MANAGEMENT OF CHARGING REQUESTS TO AVOID SECURITY ISSUES AND SERVICING DELAYS ACROSS CHARGING STATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594854
BATTERY CONTROL SYSTEM, BATTERY CONTROL METHOD AND ELECTRIC VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589665
PEER-TO-PEER DC FAST CHARGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+3.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1424 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month