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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1 and 7, lines 2-3 list the limitation “a control unit” which is not in the drawings or specification. Claims 2-5 are rejected as they depend on claim 1. Claims 8-11 are rejected as they depend on claim 7.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 7 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1 and 7, Duan et. al. (U.S. Publication No 2015/0103564) teaches a control method of a parallel resonant circuit, the parallel resonant circuit comprising N(N->2) resonant circuits (e.g. 201)(Fig. 4) connected in parallel and a control unit (e.g. 202)(Fig. 2), each of the N resonant circuits comprising power switches (e.g. SW1,SW2)(Fig. 4) and a rectifier bridge (e.g. diodes in 201 right side of T1 and T2)(Fig. 4), the control method comprising: Sampling output currents (e.g. Io’)(Fig. 4) and output voltages (e.g. Vo)(Fig. 4) of rectifier bridges of the N resonant circuits through a sampling unit (e.g. 203/205)(Fig. 4) to obtain corresponding N output current signals and N output voltage signals.
Duan et. al. does not teach calculating an average output current from the N output current signals through an average value calculating unit;
obtaining a first current difference by comparing an output current of a corresponding resonant circuit with the average output current through a voltage loop controller;
correcting a reference voltage value based on the first current difference to generate a final reference voltage value; generating an output voltage difference by comparing the final reference voltage value with an output voltage of the corresponding resonant circuit; and generating a first control voltage signal based on the output voltage difference; obtaining a second current difference by comparing a first current threshold with the output current of the corresponding resonant circuit through a current loop controller, and then generating a second control voltage signal based on the second current difference; selectively outputting the first control voltage signal or the second control voltage signal to the corresponding resonant circuit through a selection unit, and
adjusting a switching frequency of the power switches in the corresponding resonant circuit based on the first control voltage signal or the second control voltage signal, thereby achieving current-sharing or current-limiting control of the corresponding resonant circuit, wherein: when the output current of the corresponding resonant circuit is less than the first current threshold, the first control voltage signal is selectively output to the corresponding resonant circuit to control the corresponding resonant circuit to operate in a current-sharing mode; and when the output current of the corresponding resonant circuit is greater than or equal to the first current threshold, the second control voltage signal is selectively output to the corresponding resonant circuit to control the corresponding resonant circuit to operate in a current-limiting mode.
However, none of the prior art, taken singly or in combination, teach “calculating an average output current from the N output current signals through an average value calculating unit; obtaining a first current difference by comparing an output current of a corresponding resonant circuit with the average output current through a voltage loop controller; correcting a reference voltage value based on the first current difference to generate a final reference voltage value; generating an output voltage difference by comparing the final reference voltage value with an output voltage of the corresponding resonant circuit; and generating a first control voltage signal based on the output voltage difference; obtaining a second current difference by comparing a first current threshold with the output current of the corresponding resonant circuit through a current loop controller, and then generating a second control voltage signal based on the second current difference; selectively outputting the first control voltage signal or the second control voltage signal to the corresponding resonant circuit through a selection unit, and adjusting a switching frequency of the power switches in the corresponding resonant circuit based on the first control voltage signal or the second control voltage signal, thereby achieving current-sharing or current-limiting control of the corresponding resonant circuit, wherein: when the output current of the corresponding resonant circuit is less than the first current threshold, the first control voltage signal is selectively output to the corresponding resonant circuit to control the corresponding resonant circuit to operate in a current-sharing mode; and when the output current of the corresponding resonant circuit is greater than or equal to the first current threshold, the second control voltage signal is selectively output to the corresponding resonant circuit to control the corresponding resonant circuit to operate in a current-limiting mode”. Claims 2-5 and 8-11 are indicated as allowable, as they depend on claim 1 and 7.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 JONATHAN W SOILEAU whose telephone number is (571)272-6650. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30 - 4:00 CT.
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, Hammond L Crystal can be reached at 571-270-1682. 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.
/JONATHAN WALTER SOILEAU/Examiner, Art Unit 2838 /CRYSTAL L HAMMOND/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838