DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent Application No. 18/278,785, filed on 24 August, 2023, were presented for examination, and are currently pending in the application
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. 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
3. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12 December, 2025, and 7 January, 2026, were filed before the mailing date of this Office Action. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
4. In the remarks/arguments, Applicant asserts that the translation of the German Office Action addresses the IDS issue posed in the prior Office Action, and the Examiner concurs. The Examiner has considered the IDS filed 12 December, 2025, and the German Office Action cited therein, as well as the new IDS filed 7 January, 2026.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments, filed 12 December, 2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-6 and 8-10 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive.
Among the various arguments, the Examiner notes those in the main paragraph of page 8, wherein Applicant notes that Akatsu omits teaching wherein “depending on at least one operating parameter of the electric motor and/or for setting an operating mode of the electric motor, the respective at least two phases of the given strand are connected in parallel or in series with one another” and that, as indicated in the previous Office Action on page 13, Akatsu teaches them connected in parallel. Claim 1 in its broadest reasonable interpretation leaves room for, if the operating mode only requires them to be connected in parallel in the reference (which is the default if there is no mention of a mode requiring them to be in series), that they are only required to be parallel for the reference to read on the claim, which was the case for Akatsu. However, Applicant specifically argues, in line 21 of page 8, that “connection in series and connection in parallel are both required by the claim language…” As is evident from the prosecution so far, Akatsu does not teach both series and parallel in the way required by the claim limitations as defined by Applicant in page 8, and therefore falls short of the totality of claim 1’s limitations, which now require series and parallel connection in light of Applicant’s argument.
Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of Ely (US 6,366,060 B1).
5. Concerning formal matters, Applicant asserted in the response that the amendments to the title, specification, and claims overcome the objections and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) posed in the prior Office Action. The Examiner concurs, those objections and rejections have been withdrawn.
6. The prior Office Action set forth an objection to the written description for omitting Section Headings for Background Summary, Summary of the Invention, Brief Description of the Drawings, and Detailed Description of the Invention. Applicant traversed “on the basis of the fact that these headings are not required but are, rather, ‘suggested,’ as noted at page 3 of the Office Action”. In addition the argument states “The applicant chooses not to add these headings and respectfully requests that this objection be withdrawn.”
Because this is not a final action nor a disposal, the objection will be temporarily maintained to allow Applicant another chance to add these items.
Specification
4. The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
9. The disclosure is objected to because the headings for items g (1 and 2), h, i, and j are not present. The specification should be amended to include these headings, as outlined above, in ALL CAPS without underlining or bold type.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
11. Claims 1-6 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ely (US 6,366,060 B2, cited in the prior Office Action) in view of Bluemel (DE 19928106 C1, submitted by Applicant with an IDS, but cited herein with new machine translation – references to the text herein will be to the new machine translation).
12. With respect to claim 1, Ely teaches a converter [control circuit of fig. 3] configured to be connected to an n-phase electric machine (see abstract), where n is an integer greater than or equal to 6 [it is 6 via upper and lower windings of three-phases each] (see col. 2, lines 8-14), the converter including:
at least one respective coil [phase inductance 34] corresponding to a respective one [A] of the n phases (the Examiner has labeled the six phases A, B, C, A-, B-, and C- in the annotated excerpt of fig. 3, attached below), wherein at least two of the n phases [A and A-] are combined to form a strand [A strand] (the A strand has been highlighted with thickened black lines and labeled by the Examiner), wherein, for a given strand [A strand], one [A] of the at least two of the n phases of the strand is electrically rotated by 180 degrees relative to another one [A-] of the at least two phases of the strand (see col. 3, lines 30-36 which recite, inter alia, “generator 30 is shown as comprising two sets of three phase EMF sources 32 with phase inductances 34 and series resistances 36. The upper EMF sources are 180 degrees out of phase with the corresponding lower EMF sources…”), and wherein a first half [A/B/C] of the n phases are connected via at least a first point (see “upper point” been labeled by the Examiner) or a first polygon circuit and a second half [A-/B-/C-] of the n phases are connected via at least a second point (see “lower point” labeled by the Examiner) or a second polygon circuit,
PNG
media_image1.png
492
927
media_image1.png
Greyscale
n [exactly 6] switching units (circumscribed by gray boxes in the annotated excerpt above, and labeled 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 by the Examiner), each of the n switching units [1-6] being assigned to a respective one of the n phases (1 corresponds to phase A, 2 corresponds to phase B, 3 corresponds to phase C, 4 corresponds to phase A-, 5 corresponds to phase B-, and 6 corresponds to phase C-), wherein the switching units [1 and 4] assigned to the at least two phases [A and A-] of a given strand [A Strand] forming a switching module [herein called module 1-4], wherein:
each phase [A or A-, respectively] of the given strand [A Strand] is directly connected to a respective one [1 or 4, respectively] of the two switching units [1/4] of the associated switching module [module 1-4] (labeled by the Examiner) of the given strand [A Strand];
each switching unit [1/2/3/4/5/6] is connected to a voltage supply unit [+DC], and
the switching units [1 and 4] of a switching module [module 1-4] are connected to one another via an electrical connection line [42” including the spurs into the MOSFETs 44” and 46”] (see col. 3,lines 38-50 which describe “control circuit 42 for phase A/A-” which is the C/C- or 3-6 phase/module in the Examiner’s scheme, but it also says “a similar control circuit is provided between the other two phases”, clearly referring to 42”, just as 44 in the text clearly corresponds to 44” in module 1-4 and 46 clearly corresponds to 46” in module 1-4), with a connection switching element [MOSFETs 44” and 46”, respectively] being arranged in each of the switching units [1 and 4, respectively] of a switching module [module 1-4] in the electrical connection line [42”], so that depending on at least one operating parameter (speed/output, see col. 3, line 45) of the electric machine and/or for setting an operating mode of the electric machine, the respective at least two phases [A/A-] of the given strand [A strand] are connected in parallel or in series with one another (col. 3, lines 38-50 recite “the gate terminal of MOSFET 44 is controlled by series-parallel mode control circuit 48, which determines whether the circuit operates in series or parallel...” it is noted that, based on the understanding of the operation of the reference, whatever applies to MOSFETs 44 and 46 applies to 44” and 46” too – see also col. 2, lines 8-44).
Ely omits directly teaching a) wherein the electric machine is a motor, a) wherein the first and second points (upper and lower points according to the Examiner’s annotations above) are each a star point or a polygon circuit, and c) wherein each switching unit having two supply switching elements arranged to apply a supply voltage to the assigned phase.
Concerning the last omission (c), wherein each switching unit has two supply switching elements arranged to apply a supply to the assigned phase, Ely does depict, for each switching unit (the boxes and labels will be left out of the new annotated excerpt from fig. 3, below, which is enlarged and focuses on the top switching units 1-3), a “diode 52” [52] connected to the positive voltage supply [+DC], and an unlabeled element [BS] (labeled by the Examiner as “BD” referring to “bottom diode”) connected to the negative voltage supply [-DC]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the converter of Ely wherein each switching unit has two supply switching elements [diodes 52 and BD] because a) even if they are unlabeled, in the converter arts the arrow-with-apex-abutting-dashed-line is universally recognized as a switching element for connecting the supply voltage to a phase, and b) as presented by the reference, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that if [52] didn’t form a switch with [+DC], and [BD] didn’t form a switch with [-DC], the converter would not perform its designated function, said function well known in the relevant arts. The Examiner alleges that, given the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art and the ability of said one to read circuit diagrams like fig. 3 of Ely, fig. 3 actually anticipates the limitation “each switching unit has two supply switching elements arranged to apply a supply to the assigned phase”, and also simultaneously alleges that if one of ordinary skill in the art did not readily recognize/accept such universally known symbols on face value, he or she would, when attempting to make the converter of Ely, find it obvious (in fact unavoidable) to use supply switching elements every time a phase connects to a DC source and as depicted by the arrow-with-apex-abutting-dashed-line symbols used in Ely, in order to intermittently connect the respective phases with the DC voltage supply/drain, as is well known in the art to control an electric machine.
PNG
media_image2.png
374
549
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Bluemel discloses an electrical machine (generator/motor system) with three switching units driving three phases [1U1, 1V1, 1W1] of a winding system [1] and three other switching units driving three corresponding phases [2U1, 2V1, 2W1] of another winding system [2], winding systems [1] and [2] both driving and being driven by the same electric machine, wherein multi-phase current rectifier bridge circuits (corresponding to Ely’s but the circuit diagrams are drawn using a different style) provide series-parallel switching of the winding systems [1/2] (see abstract). Particularly, switches [S1] are described as “used between the winding strand connections 1U1 and 2U2…” (see page 7 of the provided translation, within the paragraph beginning “In this embodiment of FIG. 3…”) to effect “anti-serial switching” and “anti-parallel”. In other words, the switches S1 in fig. 3 perform nearly identical function of elements 42/44/46 of Ely, with Bluemel’s phases 1U1 and 2U1 corresponding to Ely’s phases A and A-, and with Bluemel’s supply voltages +UB/-UB corresponding to Ely’s +DC/-DC, these being alternate designations for phases and voltage well known in the art. Blumel further teaches, and using the same graphic format (for the points, at least), a first point wherein the first half of the phases connect and a second point wherein the second half of the phases connect.
PNG
media_image3.png
366
662
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Bluemel teaches wherein the electrical machine is a motor (the abstract recites “the generator/motor system”). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the converter of Ely, which is structurally configured to operate a motor, generator, and/or motor/generator, and use it in the motor of Bluemel, in order to provide series-parallel switching to the winding systems of a motor (Bluemel, abstract). It is well known that converters for motors can be used for generators/alternators and vice versa, such that a person of ordinary skill in the art, when in possession of a converter for achieving advantage-A in an alternator or generator, would without undue modification expect to predictably achieve advantage-A using it for a motor/starter. In this event, Ely and Bluemel teach the same advantage (series-parallel) and Bluemel goes further to actually use the machine as a motor and a generator. Fig. 3 of Ely and fig. 3 of Bluemel appear to be functionally identical, with Bluemel’s only omission, vis-à-vis claim 1, being that the connection switching elements are not explicitly shown as “in” each of the switching units, which Ely does show. So, the order of combination of references is arbitrary – the Examiner has chosen Ely to be the main reference because it actually shows the latter feature and inadvertently omits mentioning the motor and star point(s). To conclude this paragraph, Bluemel shows that this overall converter is configured for use with a motor, actually shows it used with a motor, and explicitly lays out its advantage which is to achieve series-parallel switching of the electric machine based on operating conditions/ requirements.
Bluemel teaches wherein the first and second points are each a star point or a polygon circuit (lines 11-12 of page 4 of the translation recite “the two winding systems 1 and 2 are given in the exemplary embodiment shown in a star connection – any known arrangements can be used for the two systems in the form of delta connections, zigzag circuits or the star connection shown here…”). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to make the converter of Ely, while using star points for the first/upper and second/lower points of fig. 3, as taught by Bluemel, in order to cycle the winding phases, as is well known in the art. As Ely and Bluemel (fig. 3 of each) show the same configuration of 3 coils for each point, while only Bluemel alone calls it a start connection/point, the Examiner alleges that Bluemel provides evidence that Ely actually teaches a star point. However, it is possible that one of ordinary skill in the art would require Bluemel to know that the respective claim limitation has been met, and/or would require Bluemel to meet the claim limitation by, upon viewing Ely’s points/connections and wondering how to effectuate, would find Bluemel’s star point connection a useful one, especially since it is one of the two most common solution for windings, if not the actual most common.
13. With respect to claim 2/1, Ely in view of Bluemel teaches the converter of claim 1, Ely further teaches wherein the at least one operating parameter is an operating mode [speed and/or output] (col. 3, lines 42-45 recites “the gate terminal of MOSFET 44 is controlled by series-parallel mode control circuit 48, which determines whether the circuit operates in series or parallel, based on generator speed and output…”), in a field weakening range or in a basic setting range, and/or a current voltage level of the supply voltage and/or a failure of one or more operating elements.
14. With respect to claim 3/2/1, Ely in view of Bluemel teaches the converter of claim 2, Ely further including:
a control unit [control circuit 48] arranged to actuate the supply switching elements and the connection switching elements [52/44], the control unit being set up in such a way that, as a function of the at least one operating parameter of the electric motor or in order to set the operating mode [speed and/or output] of the electric machine, the respective at least two phases of the given strand [A Strand] are connected in parallel or in series with one another (col. 3, lines 42-45 recites “the gate terminal of MOSFET 44 is controlled by series-parallel mode control circuit 48, which determines whether the circuit operates in series or parallel, based on generator speed and output…” – later in the paragraph it is recited “although this discussion has been limited to phase A, it is understood that similar control circuits control phases B and C…”).
15. With respect to claim 4/2/1, Ely in view of Bluemel teaches the converter of claim 2, Ely further teaches wherein the operating mode is an operation of the electric machine to perform a torque increase or a multilevel operation (level 1 = series, level 2 = parallel – still referring to col. 3).
16. With respect to claim 5/1, Ely in view of Bluemel teaches the converter of claim 1, Ely further teaches wherein at least half [A/B/C] of the n phases are connected via a common point (see rejection of claim 1, since this claim language is nearly unchanged from it), Bluemal teaches wherein each common point is a star point or a polygon circuit (see rejection of claim 1, above, since this claim language is nearly unchanged from it).
17. With respect to claim 6/5/1, Ely in view of Bluemel teaches the converter of claim 5, Ely further teaches wherein the at least one first point of the first half [A/B/C] of the n phases and the at least one second point of the second half [A-/B-/C-] of the n phases are separated (see fig. 3 excerpt provided in the rejection of claim 1, above). Bluemal teaches the case of star points for the points and also teaches wherein the first half [1U1/1V1/1W1] of the n phases are separated from the second half [2U1, 2V1, 2W1] of the n phases.
18. With respect to claim 9/1, Ely in view of Bluemel teaches the converter of claim 1, but neither reference explicitly recites wherein the switching units are arranged in a common unit. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the converter of Ely in view of Bluemel, while arranging multiple switching units in a common unit, so that they could be united for joint protection and relocation, such that only one casing would be required instead of many, the alternative being each switching unit, or pairs of switching units, contained in its/their own housing(s), which would require a gratuitous amount of connectors/seals, mini-housings, additional circuitry and insulations, a support board that they are all fixed to keep them from separating, etc., which would lead to exorbitant manufacturing cost and complexity.
19. With respect to claim 10/1, Ely in view of Bluemel teaches the converter of claim 1, Ely teaches a method of operating the converter, which is connected to an n-phase electrical machine, while Bluemel teaches wherein said electric machine is an n-phase motor, the method comprising:
detecting at least one operating parameter [reverse voltage across diode 52] of the n-phase electric machine and/or detecting an operating mode to be set (col. 3, lines 45-60 recite, inter alia, “bias power for the gate drive of series-parallel mode control switch 48 is derived from the reverse voltage across diode 52 by diode 54, resistor 56, and capacitor 57…); and
switching of respective at least two phases of the given strand in parallel or in series with each other depending on the detected operating parameter or the operating mode to be set (col. 3, lines 45-60 also recites “the gate terminal of MOSFET 44 is controlled by series-parallel mode control circuit 48, which determines whether the circuit operates in series or parallel, based on generator speed and output…” – it is noted that although the “circuit” is here referred to in general, it applies for each of the A Strand, B Strand, C Strand, the same way, as described in various ways throughout the disclosure).
18. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ely in view of Bluemel, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Horiuchi (JP 11215899 A1, document with machine translation provided in prior Office Action).
19. With respect to claim 7/1, Ely in view of Bluemel teaches the converter of claim 1, but neither Ely nor Bluemel teaches a fuse unit arranged between the converter and the electric motor.
Horiuchi discloses a converter unit [semiconductor rectifier device SR] controlling a motor or generator [EA] having armature windings [MA] wherein the converter unit and armature windings have three phases [R/S/T].
PNG
media_image4.png
447
448
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Horiuchi teaches a fuse unit [HSF including fuses HSF1, HSF2, and HSF3] (see annotated fig. 1 excerpt attached above, as well as the abstract, ¶ 0005, and ¶ 0009) arranged between the converter [SR] and the electric motor [EA].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the converter of Ely in view of Bluemel, while incorporating the fuse unit of Horiuchi between its converter and motor, in order to provide a compact automatic failure detector with high economical efficiency and reliability (Horiuchi abstract, lines 1-3).
20. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ely in view of Bluemel, as applied to claim 6 above, further in view of Preckwinkel (US 2015/0043254 A1, provided in the prior Office Action and cited again herein).
21. With respect to claim 8/6/1, Ely in view of Bluemel teaches the converter of claim 6, but neither Ely nor Bluemel teaches wherein the switching units of the first half of the phases and the switching units of the second half of the phases are connected to different respective voltage supply units.
Preckwinkel discloses a converter unit controlling a three-phase motor (abstract), the converter having n [6] (three in group 14a and three in group 14b) switching units for n [6] phases [L1U/L1V/L1W/L2U/L2V/L2W].
PNG
media_image5.png
404
526
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Preckwinkel teaches the switching units [in first inverter device 14a] of the first half [L1U/L1V/L1W] of the phases and the switching units [in second inverter device 14b] of the second half [L2U/L2V/L2W] of the phases are connected to different respective voltage supply units [12a and 12b, respectively].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the inverter of Ely in view of Bluemel, while incorporating different voltage supply units, as taught by Preckwinkel, in order that, in the event of failure of one inverter unit, the remaining unit can… at least continue operation with reduced power. (Preckwinkel ¶ 00054).
Conclusion
22. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL K SCHLAK whose telephone number is (703)756-1685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 am - 6:00 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, Seye Iwarere can be reached at (571) 270 - 5112. 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.
/Daniel K Schlak/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/OLUSEYE IWARERE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834