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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 9/14/2023. Claims 1-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/29/2025 and 9/14/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-5,8-12, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris (US 20230202338).
As to claim 1, Harris discloses an electric vehicle (EV) charging system (Fig. 18), comprising: a plurality of charging terminals (Fig. 18 pedestals 224-1 to 224-2), each charging terminal comprising a charging cable configured to connect to an electric vehicle (Fig. 18 EV cable 112); and an electrical equipment assembly physically separated from the plurality of charging terminals (Fig. 18 EVSEP panel 104. Fig. 13 Main Breaker and transformer 1304), the assembly comprising:
a plurality of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) loads (Fig.18 EVSEP phase breakers 102-1 and 102-2), each EVSE load configured to supply power to a respective charging terminal to provide a charge current to an EV connected to the cable of the charging terminal ([0047] [0091]-[0092] the phase L1 provides charging current flowing through a first bi-directional solid-state switch 204-1, 204-3 to PEV using the dual pedestal 224-1,-2. The phase L2 provides charging current flowing through a second bi-directional solid-state switch 204-2 to a second PEV using the dual pedestal 224-1).; and a main breaker connected to the plurality of EVSE loads (Fig. 13 Main Breaker) configured to supply power to the plurality of EVSE loads ([0079] and Fig. 13 … distributes AC power supplied from two or three phases of the secondary winding of a three-phase utility transformer 1304 to a plurality of EVSEPs 102 configured along the overhead busway 1302…Because of the high currents that can be supplied by secondary of the utility transformer 1304, the EV charging system's main service is preferably distributed underground. Fig. 13 shows the current from the transformer going though the main breaker).
Harris does not specifically clear if the main breaker is configured to provide fault protection to the plurality of EVSE loads to provide protection to each charging terminal.
However Examiner takes official notice that Main breakers in an EVS charging system provides overcurrent protection to the load it supplies.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the main breaker of Harris to be configured to provide fault protection to the plurality of EVSE loads to provide protection to each charging terminal in order to provide backup protection to the EC charging system.
Harris does not disclose/teach wherein the main breaker is at least partially solid state.
However Harris teaches the benefits Solid state circuit breaker used in EVSE specific applications ([0081] solid-state circuit breakers (SSCBs) in an EVSE specific application allows for reduced equipment costs an increased safety along with other optimizations not possible in other applications. Moreover, due to the inherent nature of SSCBs that includes millisecond reaction time to stop the flow of current).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the main breaker of Harris to be at least partially solid state in order to allow for reduced equipment costs and millisecond reaction time to stop the flow of current ([0081]).
As to claim 2, Harris teaches the system of claim 1.
Harris does not disclose/teach wherein the main breaker is a hybrid solid state mechanical breaker.
However hybrid solid state mechanical breakers are old and well known.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the main breaker of Harris to be a hybrid solid state mechanical breaker in order to allow for reduced equipment costs and millisecond reaction time to stop the flow of current ([0081] of Harris).
As to claim 3, Harris teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the main breaker is a solid state breaker ([0081]).
As to claim 4, Harris teaches the system of claim 1, wherein each charging terminal includes a housing (104) and terminal block inside the housing (Fig. 18 pedestals 224-1 to 224-2), connected between a respective EVSE load (vehicle) and the charging cable (112).
As to claim 5, Harris teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the terminal block is protected against fault by only a respective EVSE load and the main breaker in the electrical equipment assembly ([0091]-[0092] the phase L1 provides charging current flowing through a first bi-directional solid-state switch 204-1, 204-3 to PEV using the dual pedestal 224-1,-2. The phase L2 provides charging current flowing through a second bi-directional solid-state switch 204-2 to a second PEV using the dual pedestal 224-1).
Harris does not disclose/teach wherein the terminal block does not include local protection circuitry.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the terminal block of Harris to not include local protection circuitry in order to allow for a lighter pedestal, making it easier to repair, replace or transport.
As to claim 8, Harris teaches the system of claim 5.
Harris does not disclose/teach wherein each charging terminal includes no other circuitry or switching components.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the terminal block of Harris to wherein each charging terminal includes no other circuitry or switching components in order to allow for a lighter pedestal, making it easier to repair, replace or transport.
As to claim 9, Harris teaches the system of claim 1, wherein each charging terminal is disposed in an unsecured location ([0060]…when the charging cable 112 is unplugged and stored on the associated charging station's 110's pedestal. As such, User is able to unplug/plug cable into vehicle and therefor the pedestal is located in an unsecured location).
As to claim 10, Harris teaches the system of claim 9, wherein the electrical equipment assembly is disposed in a secured location and/or housing structure ([0055] each EVSEP 102 in the EVSEP panel 104).
As to claim 11, Harris teaches the system of claim 10, wherein each charging terminal is connected to a respective EVSE load via a connecting conductor (carrying conductors l1,L2).
As to claim 12, Harris teaches the system of claim 1, wherein each EVSE load is configured to determine when there is fault between the respective EVSE load and a respective charging terminal, and to shut off in a fault condition ([0060] Any detected imbalance in the two currents is indicative of a possible ground fault (GF). Accordingly, when an imbalance is detected, the GFCI sensing circuit sends a GF detect signal to the EVSEP's 102's MCU 202, which then responds as quickly as possible to transition the EVSEP 102 to the OFF state).
As to claim 17, Harris teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the main breaker is the only breaker for the plurality of EVSE loads and charging terminals (Fig. 13 one Main EVSE breaker is shown).
As to clam 18, Harris discloses an electrical equipment assembly for electric vehicle charging (Fig. 18), the assembly physically separated from a plurality of charging terminals (Fig. 18 EVSEP panel 104. Fig. 13 Main Breaker and transformer 1304), the assembly comprising:
a plurality of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) loads (Fig.18 EVSEP phase breakers 102-1 and 102-2), each EVSE load configured to supply power to a respective charging terminal to provide a charge current to an EV connected to the cable of the charging terminal ([0047] [0091]-[0092] the phase L1 provides charging current flowing through a first bi-directional solid-state switch 204-1, 204-3 to PEV using the dual pedestal 224-1,-2. The phase L2 provides charging current flowing through a second bi-directional solid-state switch 204-2 to a second PEV using the dual pedestal 224-1); and a main breaker connected to the plurality of EVSE loads (Fig. 13 Main Breaker) configured to supply power to the plurality of EVSE loads ([0079] and Fig. 13 … distributes AC power supplied from two or three phases of the secondary winding of a three-phase utility transformer 1304 to a plurality of EVSEPs 102 configured along the overhead busway 1302…Because of the high currents that can be supplied by secondary of the utility transformer 1304, the EV charging system's main service is preferably distributed underground. Fig. 13 shows the current from the transformer going though the main breaker) wherein the main breaker is the only breaker for the plurality of EVSE loads (Fig. 13 one Main EVSE breaker is shown).
Harris does not specifically clear if the main breaker is configured to provide fault protection to the plurality of EVSE loads to provide protection to each charging terminal.
However Examiner takes official notice that Main breakers in an EVS charging system provides overcurrent protection to the load it supplies.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the main breaker of Harris to be configured to provide fault protection to the plurality of EVSE loads to provide protection to each charging terminal in order to provide backup protection to the EC charging system.
Harris does not disclose/teach wherein the main breaker is at least partially solid state.
However Harris teaches the benefits Solid state circuit breaker used in EVSE specific applications ([0081] solid-state circuit breakers (SSCBs) in an EVSE specific application allows for reduced equipment costs an increased safety along with other optimizations not possible in other applications. Moreover, due to the inherent nature of SSCBs that includes millisecond reaction time to stop the flow of current).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the main breaker of Harris to beat least partially solid state in order to allow for reduced equipment costs and millisecond reaction time to stop the flow of current([0081] of Harris).
Claims 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris (US 20230202338) in view of Neligan US 20230011299)
As to claim 6, Harris teaches the system of claim 5.
Harris does not disclose/teach wherein the terminal block includes a switch configured to carry suitable current from the electrical equipment assembly to the charging cable.
Neligan teaches wherein the terminal block includes a switch configured to carry suitable current from the electrical equipment assembly to the charging cable (Fig.2-3 2G [0247] each charging connector 2E of the transportable charging station 2 receives a DC charging current from an associated DC/DC converter 2F via a switch 2G) .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the terminal block of Harris to include a switch configured to carry suitable current from the electrical equipment assembly to the charging cable in order to enable a flexible correlation from a first charge cable or a second charge cable to a first or second battery pack 2D ([0247]).
As to claim 7, Harris in view of Neligan teaches the system of claim 6, wherein the switch is a relay and/or a definite purpose contactor (Fig. 11 of Neligan, 2G).
Claims, 13,16, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris (US 20230202338) in view of Thompson (US 20140211345).
As to claim 13, Harris teaches the system of claim 12.
Harris does not disclose/teach wherein the main breaker is configured to trip in the fault condition to thereby shutdown current to the plurality of EVSE loads and to clear the fault condition.
Thompson teaches wherein the main breaker is configured to trip in the fault condition and to clear the fault condition ([0173] An islanding main circuit breaker add-on module trips the main circuit breaker when power is lost from the electric utility (and closes it when it is reestablished)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the main breaker of Harris to wherein the main breaker is configured to trip in the fault condition to thereby shutdown current to the plurality of EVSE loads and to clear the fault condition in order to conserve power consumption and prevent energy waste and unexpected transients.
As to claim 16, Harris in view of Thompson teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the fault condition is a ground fault or an overcurrent beyond a threshold ([0060] EVSEP's GFCI 214 has the ability to detect as a ground fault, even when the charging cable 112 is unplugged and stored on the associated charging station's 110's pedestal. Accordingly, once the GFCI 214 detects the fault condition, the EVSEP 102 transitions as quickly as possible from the STANDBY state to the OFF state, to prevent any further usage of the charging cable 112 and associated charging station 110).
As to claim 19, Harris teaches the assembly of claim 18, wherein each EVSE load is configured to determine when there is fault between the respective EVSE load and a respective charging terminal, and to shut off in a fault condition ([0060] Any detected imbalance in the two currents is indicative of a possible ground fault (GF). Accordingly, when an imbalance is detected, the GFCI sensing circuit sends a GF detect signal to the EVSEP's 102's MCU 202, which then responds as quickly as possible to transition the EVSEP 102 to the OFF state).
Harris does not disclose/teach wherein the main breaker is configured to trip in the fault condition to thereby shutdown current to the plurality of EVSE loads and to clear the fault condition.
Thompson teaches wherein the main breaker is configured to trip in the fault condition and to clear the fault condition ([0173] An islanding main circuit breaker add-on module trips the main circuit breaker when power is lost from the electric utility (and closes it when it is reestablished)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the main breaker of Harris to wherein the main breaker is configured to trip in the fault condition to thereby shutdown current to the plurality of EVSE loads and to clear the fault condition in order to conserve power consumption and prevent energy waste and unexpected transients.
Claims 14-15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris (US 20230202338) in view of Thompson (US 20140211345) in view of Erven (US 20250202218).
As to claim 14, Harris in view of Thompson teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the main breaker is configured to turn on to allow other non-faulted EVSE loads to operate thereby allowing one or more charging terminals associated with the non-faulted EVSE loads to be operational (([0079] and Fig. 13).
Harris in view of Thompson does not disclose/teach wherein each EVSE load is configured to communicate a fault signal to the main breaker to indicate the fault when in the fault condition.
Erven teaches wherein each EVSE load is configured to communicate a fault signal to the main breaker to indicate the fault when in the fault condition ([0061] The sensor S1 is connected to a sensor line 13 for transmitting the measured values I, U captured by the sensor S1 to an arc fault protection unit 16 which is also referred to as PADD (=Parallel Arc Detection Device). From the arc fault protection unit 16, control lines 10 run to the main switch 6 and the short-circuiting device 7 for transmitting control signals, e.g. a trip signal or a blockage signal, from the arc fault protection unit 16 to the main switch 6 and the short-circuiting device 7).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Harris to wherein each EVSE load is configured to communicate a fault signal to the main breaker to indicate the fault when in the fault condition in order to trip the main breaker when there is an arc fault.
As to claim 15, Harris in view of Thompson in view of Erven teaches the system of claim 14.
Harris in view of Thompson in view of Erven does not disclose/teach wherein the main breaker is configured such that if no fault signal is received from one or more EVSE loads, the main breaker remains off to prevent current to all of the EVSE loads.
However, dual fault protection on circuit breakers are old and well known. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the main breaker to be configured such that if no fault signal is received from one or more EVSE loads, the main breaker remains off to prevent current to all of the EVSE loads in order to prevent any overloading.
As to claim 20, Harris in view of Thompson teaches the assembly of claim 19. wherein the main breaker is configured to turn on to allow other non-faulted EVSE loads to operate thereby allowing one or more charging terminals associated with the non-faulted EVSE loads to be operational (([0079] and Fig. 13).
Harris in view of Thompson does not disclose/teach wherein each EVSE load is configured to communicate a fault signal to the main breaker to indicate the fault when in the fault condition.
Erven teaches wherein each EVSE load is configured to communicate a fault signal to the main breaker to indicate the fault when in the fault condition ([0061] The sensor S1 is connected to a sensor line 13 for transmitting the measured values I, U captured by the sensor S1 to an arc fault protection unit 16 which is also referred to as PADD (=Parallel Arc Detection Device). From the arc fault protection unit 16, control lines 10 run to the main switch 6 and the short-circuiting device 7 for transmitting control signals, e.g. a trip signal or a blockage signal, from the arc fault protection unit 16 to the main switch 6 and the short-circuiting device 7.).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Harris to wherein each EVSE load is configured to communicate a fault signal to the main breaker to indicate the fault when in the fault condition in order to trip the main breaker when there is an arc fault.
Harris in view of Thompson in view of Erven does not disclose/teach wherein the main breaker is configured such that if no fault signal is received from one or more EVSE loads, the main breaker remains off to prevent current to all of the EVSE loads.
However, dual fault protection on circuit breakers are old and well known. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the main breaker to be configured such that if no fault signal is received from one or more EVSE loads, the main breaker remains off to prevent current to all of the EVSE loads in order to prevent any overloading.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYNESE V MCDANIEL whose telephone number is (313)446-6579. The examiner can normally be reached on M to F, 9am to 530pm.
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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TYNESE V MCDANIEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights