DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 10/10/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending, of which claim 19 was withdrawn as non-elected invention Species II directing to embodiments of DC/DC converter by Applicants in the response on 06/16/2025, claims 1-3, 6-11, and 17-19 are amended, and claim 20 is newly added by the current amendment.
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 .
Drawing
The drawing submitted on 10/10/2023 is acknowledged and accepted by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9-11, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 9-11, Applicant recite the limitations “ … AC source configured to output an AC …”, “ … the AC source to … the AC …”, “… the AC …” in claims 1-3 respectively. Applicant further recite limitation “ … AC voltage …” without proper antecedence basis in claim 9. It is not clear if AC voltage recited in claim 9 Applicant is intended referring to is the voltage of the AC as recited in claims 1-3, or it is a completely different AC voltage. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. Applicant’s correction is required.
Claims 10-11 are rejected because of the dependency to the rejected claim 9 as discussed above
Claims 17-18, Applicant recite the limitations “ … or a non-resonant DC/DC conversion circuit …”, “ … DC/DC conversion circuit …” in claim 17 without proper antecedence basis. In the Response to Election/Restriction Requirement on 06/16/2025 Applicants have elected invention Species I direct to AC/DC or DC/AC converters without traverse, and the DC/DC converters of Invention Species II has being treated as non-elected invention and therefore withdrawing from further considering, until upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141. In view of Specification applicants submitted there is no evidence or indication of the AC/DC or DC/AC Applicant elected species comprising a DC/DC conversion circuit, or overlapping with the Species I Applicants elected. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. Applicant’s correction is required. Applicants are advised to amend the scope of the claim only to the elected invention Species I.
Claim 18 is rejected because of the dependency to the rejected claim 17 as discussed above
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8, 12, 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Jeong et al. (US Patent or PG Pub. No. 8711588, hereinafter ‘588).
Claim 1, ‘588 teaches an alternating current/direct current (AC/DC) converter (e.g., see Fig. 3-7), comprising: an AC source configured to output an AC (e.g., 10); one or more AC lines electrically connected to the AC source to conduct the AC (e.g., see Fig. 3, 4A, 5A, 7); a conversion circuit (e.g., 60, 30) operatively electrically connected to the one or more AC lines, wherein the conversion circuit is configured to perform at least one of AC-to-DC conversion (e.g., AC/DC, see Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7) or DC-to-AC conversion, wherein the conversion circuit includes one or more switches (e.g., 30, 40) configured to be controlled to perform at least one of the AC-to-DC conversion or the DC-to-AC conversion (e.g., see Fig. 3, 4A, 5A, 7); one or more filter inductors (e.g., the inductance being modified by Sn10 and/or Sn20) electrically connected to at least one of the one or more AC lines (e.g., see Fig. 3, 4a, 5A, 7); and an inductance control system (e.g., the circuits comprising 40, 70, and the single common core shared by inductive devices) operatively connected to the one or more filter inductors to modify an inductance of the one or more filter inductors (e.g., see col. 9 line 66 – col. 10 line 11) to maintain a constant switching frequency while maintaining soft switching of the one or more switches (e.g., ZVS, col. 8 line 66-col. 9 line 5) independent of variations in at least one of the AC or a load connected to the conversion circuit (e.g., the switching frequency of 30 independent of variations of the load, see Fig. 2-7).
Claim 2, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the inductance control system includes a control module connected to the AC source to sense the AC (e.g., sensing or detecting 10 is implicitly taught in order for 70 be able to generate control signals and control Gn10 and Gn20 as function of in input AC 10, see Fig. 4B, 5B).
Claim 3, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 2 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the control module is configured to modify the inductance of the one or more filter inductors based on at least one of the AC or the load (e.g., sensing or detecting 10 is implicitly taught in order for 70 be able to generate control signals and control Gn10 and Gn20 as function of in input AC 10, see Fig. 4B, 5B).
Claim 4, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 3 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the inductance control system further includes at least one DC source (e.g., the voltage across D20, and the voltage across D10) connected to the control module and configured to be controlled by the control module to output a control DC (e.g., the output of 70, see Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7, and 4B, 5B).
Claim 5, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 4 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the inductance control system further includes one or more control lines (e.g., the lines between 40 and 70, and lines between 70 and 30) electrically connected to the at least one DC source to receive the control DC (e.g., to receive the output of 70, see Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7).
Claim 6, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 5 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the inductance control system further includes one or more control inductors (e.g., see , col. 9 line 66 – col. 10 line 11, claim 1, Fig. 3, 4A, 5A) electrically connected to the at least one DC source via the one or more control lines (e.g., through Sn10, Sn20, S10, and/or S20, and Lm1/Lm2), and wherein the one or more control inductors are coupled with the one or more filter inductors to apply a magnetic field (e.g., through the single common magnetic core) to the one or more filter inductors to modify the inductance of the one or more filter inductors (e.g., the combined inductance of Lm1+Ls10, and/or Lm2+Ls20, see col. 9 line 66 – col. 10 line 11, claim 1, Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7).
Claim 7, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 6 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the one or more filter inductors include a core (e.g., the single common magnetic core), and wherein the one or more control inductors are configured to modify a magnetic permeability of the core, thereby modifying the inductance of the one or more filter inductors (e.g., see col. 9 line 66 – col. 10 line 11).
Claim 8, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 3 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the control module is configured to control the control DC to achieve a desired inductance of the one or more filter inductors as a function of at least one of an amplitude (e.g., the amplitude of the AC, see Fig. 4B, 5B) or frequency of the AC.
Claim 12, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the AC source is a single phase (e.g., the single-phase AC 10, see Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7).
Claim 14, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein an inductance of each filter inductor is controlled independently of one or more other filter inductors (e.g., independently controlled by Sn10 and Sn20 respectively, see Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7).
Claim 15, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein an inductance of each filter inductor is controlled the same as one or more other filter inductors (e.g., see Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7).
Claim 16, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. It further teaches that wherein the one or more filter inductors are between the AC source and the conversion circuit (e.g., see Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1,148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jeong et al. (US Patent or PG Pub. No. 8711588, hereinafter ‘588), in view of Xu (US Patent or PG Pub. No. 20210111637, hereinafter ‘637).
Claim 13, ‘588 teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. ‘588 further teaches that wherein the AC source includes a phase connected to a plurality of phase lines, and wherein each of the plurality of phase lines includes at least one of the one or more filter inductors configured to be controlled by the inductance control system (e.g., Ls10, Ls20 independently controlled by Sn10 and Sn20 respectively, see Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7).
‘588 does not explicitly disclose that wherein the AC source includes a plurality of phases.
‘637 discloses an AC/DC converter circuit wherein the AC source includes a plurality of phases (e.g., the 3-phase AC input, see Fig. 1) in order to be able to continuously provide DC output when one input phase is disconnected or is short circuited (e.g., see [0005][0030][0031]; Fig. 1-2).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify ‘588 by include the 3-phase AC input to the AC/DC converter as taught by ‘637 in order of being able to continuously provide DC output when one input phase is disconnected or is short circuited (e.g., see [0005][0030][0031]; Fig. 1).
Claim 20, the combination or “588 and ’637 teaches the limitations of claim 13 as discussed above. ‘588 further teaches wherein each filter inductor is configured to be controlled independently of one or more other filter inductors (e.g., Ls10, Ls20 independently controlled by Sn10 and Sn20 respectively, see Fig. 3-4A, 5A, 7).
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jeong et al. (US Patent or PG Pub. No. 8711588, hereinafter ‘588), in view of Sahoo et al. (US Patent or PG Pub. No. 10389166, hereinafter ‘166).
Claim 17, ‘588 teaches method comprising: modifying inductance of one or more filter inductors (e.g., the inductance being modified by Sn10 and/or Sn20) associated with an alternating current/direct current (AC/DC) conversion circuit (e.g., see Fig. 3, 4A, 5A, 7) or a non-resonant DC/DC conversion circuit to maintain a constant switching frequency (e.g., the switching frequency of 30) while maintaining soft switching of one or more switches of the AC/DC (e.g., ZVS, col. 8 line 66-col. 9 line 5) or DC/DC conversion circuit independent of variations in at least one of an AC from an AC source (e.g., 10) or variations in a load connected to the AC/DC (e.g., the switching frequency of 30 independent of variations of the load, see Fig. 2-7) or DC/DC conversion circuit.
‘588 does not explicitly disclose that a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer executable instructions configured to cause a computer to perform the method.
‘166 discloses a method of an AC/DC converter circuit (e.g., 152, see Fig. 1, 3, 4, 6-9) further comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer executable instructions configured to cause a computer to perform the method to control the converter circuit (e.g., see col. 12 line 53-col. 13 line 29, col. 13 line 61- col. 14 line 8, Fig. 1, 3, 4, 6-9).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify ‘588 by include the non-transitory computer readable medium having computer executable instructions configured to cause the computer to perform the method as taught by ‘166 in order of being able to control and operate the AC to DC converter circuit (e.g., see col. 12 line 53-col. 13 line 29, col. 13 line 61- col. 14 line 8, Fig. 1, 3, 4, 6-9).
Claim 18, the combination or “588 and ’166 teaches the limitations of claim 17 as discussed above. ‘588 further teaches, wherein the method further comprises sensing the AC from the AC source, wherein modifying the inductance of the one or more filter inductors is based on the sensed AC (e.g., sensing or detecting 10 is implicitly taught in order for 70 be able to generate control signals and control Gn10 and Gn20 as function of in input AC 10, see Fig. 4B, 5B).
Examiner's Note:
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUE ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1263. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8:30AM-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Monica Lewis can be reached on 571-272-2838. 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.
/JUE ZHANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights