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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/08/2024 and 04/14/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph 0002 “to charge one or capacitors” should be “to charge one or more capacitors”.
Paragraph 0045 “to charge one or capacitors” should be “to charge one or more capacitors”.
Paragraph 0052 “to the comparator 170” is incorrect as the Figures label Component 130 as the comparator. This should be changed to “to the comparator 130”.
Paragraph 0056 “may be similar or substantially” should be “may be similar or substantially similar”.
Paragraph 0056 “comparator 370” should be “comparator 330”.
Paragraph 0056 “comparator 369 can indicate” should be “comparator 330 can indicate”.
Paragraph 0058 “the comparator compares the rate of rise of the voltage (365) across the resistor (Rdvdt) and compares it to the threshold 370” is confusing because it is unclear if the comparator is going the comparison before comparing it with the threshold or if there is only one comparison being done. The Examiner believes this should be “the comparator receives the rate of rise of the voltage (365) across the resistor (Rdvdt) and compares it to the threshold 370”.
Paragraph 0074 “the back-surge of can potentially damage” should be “the back-surge of current can potentially damage”.
Appropriate correction is required.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it contains phrases that are not acceptable within the abstract (see below for details). Furthermore, the abstract reads as a claim and that is not what the abstract is meant to be. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4, line 2, “and a diode” should be changed to “and the diode”.
Claim 19, line 1 and lines 17-18, recites “back-surge protection system for power supplies” and “discontinue the generation of the voltage to protect the power supply”. This is confusing because one part of the claim seems to indicate the presence of multiple power supplies while the body of the claim indicates a singular one. If this is a new power supply the article should be “a” not “the” and if this is the same one then the same term should be used. For purposes of examination the Examiner has interpreted the body of the claim to have more patentable weight so the preamble is understood to be read as “back-surge protection system for a power supply”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections
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.
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, 7, 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao (US 2007/0159139 A1) in view of Moran (US 2004/0125518 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yao teaches a method for protecting (Figure 1; Paragraphs 0011 and 0019) a power supply (Figure 1 Component 12), comprising: generating a voltage at an output of the power supply (The power supply has an output which provides an output voltage; Paragraphs 0012 and 0021); monitoring a rate of change of the voltage with a detection-protection circuit (Figure 1 Component 44 monitors dv/dt; Paragraph 0021), the detection-protection circuit comprising a capacitor and a plurality of resistors having different resistance values (Figure 1 Component 44 has a capacitor, Components C1/C2, and a plurality of resistors, Components R5-R10, having different resistance values; Paragraph 0025); in response to the rate of change of the voltage exceeding a threshold, discontinuing the generation of the voltage to protect the power supply (Abstract; Paragraphs 0012 and 0020 highlight that in response to dv/dt exceeding a threshold value, the level of power supplied to the generator is reduced or turned off, which is a discontinuation of the generation of voltage, to protect the power supply).
Yao does not teach preventing a back bias into at least a portion of the detection-protection circuit, wherein the preventing the back bias is based at least on a respective resistance value of each of the plurality of resistors.
Moran teaches preventing a back bias into at least a portion of the detection-protection circuit, wherein the preventing the back bias is based at least on a respective resistance value of each of the plurality of resistors (A reverse current (back bias) protection device protects a fuel cell, which includes a detection circuit for such protection, where the prevention of reverse current is based on resistors which have resistance values; abstract; Paragraphs 0007-0008 and 0025).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yao to include preventing a back bias into at least a portion of the detection-protection circuit, wherein the preventing the back bias is based at least on a respective resistance value of each of the plurality of resistors as taught by Moran for the advantages of protecting a power source from damage caused by reverse current.
Regarding claim 7, Yao and Moran teach all the limitations of claim 1. Yao further teaches wherein the generating the voltage at the output of the power supply further comprises applying a direct current (DC) waveform at an input of the power supply (Paragraphs 0003 and 0010-0012 highlight the voltage generated from the power supply can be of a DC generator).
Regarding claim 9, Yao and Moran teach all the limitations of claim 1. Yao further teaches wherein discontinuing the generation of the voltage is based at least in part on detecting an open-circuit fault at the output of the power supply (Paragraphs 0010-0012, 0020 and 0022 highlight the turning off of the voltage is based in part on fault detection which includes an open-circuit fault).
Regarding claim 19, Yao teaches an open-circuit and back-surge protection system for power supplies (Figure 1), comprising: a detection-protection circuit, the detection-protection circuit coupled between an input end and an output end of a power supply (A protection circuit for a generator having a power supply 12 coupled between an input end and output end of a power supply; abstract; fig 1; Paragraphs 0011 and 0019), the detection-protection circuit comprising: a resistor-capacitor circuit having a capacitor and a first resistor arranged in series (Component 44 includes at least one capacitor and a plurality of resistors including R6/R5/R7; Paragraph 0025); and one or more processing devices configured to: monitor, using the detection-protection circuit, a rate of change of a voltage at the output end of the power supply; and in response to the rate of change of the voltage exceeding a threshold, discontinue the generation of the voltage to protect the power supply (Figure 1 Component 44; Abstract; Paragraphs 0012 and 0020 highlight that in response to dv/dt exceeding a threshold value, the level of power supplied to the generator is reduced or turned off, which is a discontinuation of the generation of voltage, to protect the power supply).
Yao does not teach and a back bias prevention circuit having at least a second resistor, wherein the back bias prevention circuit is configured to prevent a back bias into the capacitor of the resistor-capacitor circuit, based at least in part on the first and second resistors having different resistance values.
Moran teaches a back-surge protection system, a back bias prevention circuit having at least a second resistor, wherein the back bias prevention circuit is configured to prevent a back bias into the capacitor of the resistor-capacitor circuit, based at least in part on the first and second resistors having different resistance values (A reverse current (back bias) protection device protects a fuel cell, which includes a detection circuit with resistors and capacitors for such protection, where the prevention of reverse current is based on resistors which have resistance values; abstract; Paragraphs 0007-0008 and 0025).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yao to include a back-surge protection system, a back bias prevention circuit having at least a second resistor, wherein the back bias prevention circuit is configured to prevent a back bias into the capacitor of the resistor-capacitor circuit, based at least in part on the first and second resistors having different resistance values as taught by Moran to gain the advantages of protecting a power source from damage caused by reverse current.
Claims 6, 10 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao (US 2007/0159139 A1) in view of Moran (US 2004/0125518 A1) and in further view of Jang (US 2024/0048055 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Yao and Moran teach all the limitations of claim 1. Yao does not teach wherein the generating the voltage at the output of the power supply further comprises: applying an alternating current (AC) waveform at an input of the power supply; and rectifying the AC waveform to produce a rectified direct current (DC) waveform with an AC component at the output of the power supply.
Jang teaches a power circuit (Figure 1), comprising: a power supply having an AC input power source applying an AC waveform at an input of the power supply (Figure 1 Component AC source); a rectifier for rectifying the AC waveform to produce a rectified DC waveform with an AC component at the output of the power supply (Figure 1 Component 110); a plurality of output terminals configured for coupled to a load (Figure 1 Component 130 has a plurality of output terminals; Figure 3 shows the plurality of output terminals in detail).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings Yao to incorporate a rectifier at the input terminal as taught by Jang. The advantage of this design is that an AC source can still be used in a system that requires a DC input voltage thus increasing the usability of the system overall.
Regarding claim 10, Yao teaches a power supply (Figure 1) comprising: an input end configured for coupling to a power source (Figure 1 Component 12); a detection-protection circuit (Figure 1 Components 40+4+48) comprising: a resistor-capacitor circuit having a capacitor and a first resistor (Figure 1 Components C2 and R7), a second resistor (Figure 1 Component R5), the first and second resistors having different resistance values (Figure 1 Components R5-R10 have different resistance values; Paragraph 0025); and one or more processing devices configured to: monitor a voltage across the plurality of output terminals using the detection-protection circuit; and disable the power source responsive to the monitored voltage reaching a threshold (Figure 1 Component 44; Abstract; Paragraphs 0012 and 0020 highlight that in response to dv/dt exceeding a threshold value, the level of power supplied to the generator is reduced or turned off, which is a discontinuation of the generation of voltage, to protect the power supply).
Yao does not teach a plurality of output terminal configured for coupling to a load; a back bias prevention circuit having at least a second resistor, wherein the back bias prevention circuit is configured to prevent a back bias into the capacitor of the resistor-capacitor circuit based at least in part on the first and second resistors having different resistance values.
Moran teaches a back-surge protection system, a back bias prevention circuit having at least a second resistor, wherein the back bias prevention circuit is configured to prevent a back bias into the capacitor of the resistor-capacitor circuit, based at least in part on the first and second resistors having different resistance values (A reverse current (back bias) protection device protects a fuel cell, which includes a detection circuit with resistors and capacitors for such protection, where the prevention of reverse current is based on resistors which have resistance values; abstract; Paragraphs 0007-0008 and 0025).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yao to include a back-surge protection system, a back bias prevention circuit having at least a second resistor, wherein the back bias prevention circuit is configured to prevent a back bias into the capacitor of the resistor-capacitor circuit, based at least in part on the first and second resistors having different resistance values as taught by Moran to gain the advantages of protecting a power source from damage caused by reverse current.
Jang teaches a power circuit (Figure 1), comprising: a power supply having an AC input power source applying an AC waveform at an input of the power supply (Figure 1 Component AC source); a rectifier for rectifying the AC waveform to produce a rectified DC waveform with an AC component at the output of the power supply (Figure 1 Component 110); a plurality of output terminals configured for coupled to a load (Figure 1 Component 130 has a plurality of output terminals; Figure 3 shows the plurality of output terminals in detail).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings Yao to incorporate a plurality of output terminals as taught by Jang. The advantage of this design is that multiple output voltages can be used to power a load or several loads simultaneously making the system more efficient in providing an output voltage.
Regarding claim 16, Yao, Moran and Jang teach all the limitations of claim 10. Yao further teaches wherein disabling the power source is based at least in part on detecting an open-circuit fault across the output terminals of the power supply (Paragraphs 0010-0012, 0020 and 0022).
Regarding claim 17, Yao, Moran and Jang teach all the limitations of claim 10. Yao does not teach a rectifier circuit coupled to the input end and configured to receive an alternating current (AC) waveform from the power source and provide a rectified direct current (DC) waveform with an AC component at the output terminals of the power supply.
Jang teaches a power circuit (Figure 1), comprising: a power supply having an AC input power source applying an AC waveform at an input of the power supply (Figure 1 Component AC source); a rectifier for rectifying the AC waveform to produce a rectified DC waveform with an AC component at the output of the power supply (Figure 1 Component 110); a plurality of output terminals configured for coupled to a load (Figure 1 Component 130 has a plurality of output terminals; Figure 3 shows the plurality of output terminals in detail).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings Yao to incorporate a rectifier at the input terminal as taught by Jang. The advantage of this design is that an AC source can still be used in a system that requires a DC input voltage thus increasing the usability of the system overall.
Regarding claim 18, Yao, Moran and Jang teach all the limitations of claim 10. Yao further teaches wherein the power source comprises a direct current (DC) power source (Paragraphs 0003 and 0010-0012).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 8, 11-15 and 20 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, none of the prior art, made of record, singularly or in combinations, teaches or fairly suggests wherein the detection-protection circuit comprises: a resistor-capacitor circuit having the capacitor and a first resistor arranged in series; a diode; and a second resistor, wherein the first resistor has a higher resistance value than the second resistor; and wherein the method further comprises: preventing damage to the resistor-capacitor circuit, based in part on the diode preventing high frequency harmonics from entering the capacitor of the resistor-capacitor circuit.
Claims 3-5 depend upon claim 2.
Regarding claim 8, none of the prior art, made of record, singularly or in combinations, teaches or fairly suggests wherein the method further comprises: minimizing or reducing a false detection of an open-circuit fault at the output of the power supply by slowing down or reducing the rate of change of the voltage.
Regarding claim 11, none of the prior art, made of record, singularly or in combinations, teaches or fairly suggests wherein, the resistor-capacitor circuit comprises the capacitor arranged in series with the first resistor; and the back bias prevention circuit further comprises a diode, wherein a first end of the diode is coupled between the capacitor and the first resistor, and wherein a second end of the diode is coupled to a first end of the second resistor and a comparator.
Claims 12-14 depend upon claim 11.
Regarding claim 15, none of the prior art, made of record, singularly or in combinations, teaches or fairly suggests wherein the back bias prevention circuit is configured to minimize or reduce a likelihood of a false detection of an open-circuit fault across the output terminals of the power supply by slowing down or reducing the rate of change of the voltage.
Regarding claim 20, none of the prior art, made of record, singularly or in combinations, teaches or fairly suggests wherein: the back bias prevention circuit further comprises a diode, wherein a first end of the diode is coupled between the capacitor and the first resistor, and wherein a second end of the diode is coupled to a first end of the second resistor and a comparator; and a resistance value of the first resistor is at least 500 times greater than a resistance value of the second resistor.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tran (WO 2023/214961 A1) teaches a method of protecting a load circuit includes sensing a load current passing through a switch electrically in series with the load circuit, sensing a voltage drop across the switch, determining a rate of change of the voltage drop across the switch, determining whether to deactivate the switch based on the load current and the rate of change of the voltage drop across the switch, in response to determining to deactivate the switch, deactivating the switch to shut off current to the load circuit.
Yu (US 2020/0328590 A1) teaches a control circuit for an input filter circuit in a switch mode power supply comprising a power switch and a switch controller to control the power switch to provide a regulated output voltage and current to a load. The control circuit, also referred to as a filter control circuit, can be used to detect a high voltage surge at its input and disconnect a capacitor in the input filter circuit from an input return, thereby protecting the input filter capacitor and the SMPS from damage. According to certain aspects, the control circuit can be integrated with the switch controller. Additionally, the control circuit can provide power to the switch controller at start-up.
Peterson (US 2019/0107571 A1) teaches a sensor interface wherein the sensor interface can include a diode. The diode can connect the drive circuit to the sensor circuit. The diode can be arranged to oppose current flow from the sensor circuit to the drive circuit. The back-bias circuit can include a back-bias resistor. The back-bias resistor can be connected to the diode. The back-bias resistor can have electrical resistance that is less than or equal to resistance of the drive circuit when in the inactive state. The back-bias circuit can include a back-bias voltage source. The back-bias resistor can connect the back-bias voltage source to the diode.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shahzeb K. Ahmad whose telephone number is (571)272-0978. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 A.M. to 5 P.M..
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, Thienvu V. Tran can be reached at 571-270-1276. 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.
/Shahzeb K Ahmad/Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights