DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
This office action is a non-final rejection in response to the filing of the applicant’s “response to election / restriction requirement” filed on 10/20/2025. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A (FIG. 3, Claims 1-14) in the reply filed on 10/20/2025 is acknowledged.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that:
“Applicant hereby traverses the restriction requirement issued by the Examiner and instead proposes election of FIG. 3 - FIG. 7, and FIG. 14, related to claims 1 - 14, for prosecution. The figures FIG. 3 - FIG. 7, and FIG. 14 each describe aspects of the high side circuitry of the claimed bridge rectifier circuit. For example, FIG. 4 and FIG. 5 each depict aspects of the high side voltage control circuitry 330 shown in FIG. 3. Similarly, FIG. 6 and FIG. 7 each depict aspects of the high side voltage control circuitry 332 shown in FIG. 3. FIG. 14 provides an example embodiment of the intermediate voltage discharge circuitry 456, 656 depicted in FIG. 4 and FIG. 6, respectively. Claims 1 - 14 recite various aspects of the high side circuitry shown in FIG. 3 - FIG. 7, and FIG. 14.”;
Furthermore, in response to applicant’s allegation, the examiner respectfully disagrees since this is not found persuasive because it would be a serious burden for searching the non-elected species (Species B-L) as their variable configurations require different search queries/strategies since these are directed to different / diverse embodiments and distinct structure configurations and arrangements of the voltage control circuitry enabling high voltage compatible rectifier for wireless charging, specifically diverse configurations of control elements and circuitry in various figures 4-14, in addition it is noted that claim 2 contains language directed to the “low side portion”.
All claims that the examiner finds are not directed to the elected invention are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner in accordance with 37 CFR 1.142(b). See MPEP § 821.01 through § 821.04.
Additionally, when two or more independent and distinct inventions are presented for examination, the examiner may make a restriction requirement if a serious burden exists. In the reply to the restriction requirement, applicant must elect one invention for examination, therefore is not permissible to elect a second invention for examination (see MPEP 818).
For applicants information, see MPEP 809.02(a), specifically, where restriction between species is appropriate (see MPEP § 808.01(a)) the examiner should send a letter including only a restriction requirement).
The particular reasons relied on by the examiner for holding that the inventions as claimed are either independent or distinct were concisely stated in the requirement for restriction/election sent on 07/10/2025.
Action as follows should be taken:
(A) Identify generic claims or indicate that no generic claims are present. See MPEP § 806.04(d) for definition of a generic claim.
(B) Clearly identify each (or in aggravated cases at least exemplary ones) of the disclosed species, to which claims are to be restricted. The species are preferably identified as the species of figures 1, 2, and 3 or the species of examples I, II, and III, respectively. In the absence of distinct figures or examples to identify the several species, the mechanical means, the particular material, or other distinguishing characteristic of the species should be stated for each species identified. If the species cannot be conveniently identified, the claims may be grouped in accordance with the species to which they are restricted. Provide reasons why the species are independent or distinct.
(C) Applicant should then be required to elect a single disclosed species under 35 U.S.C. 121, and advised as to the requisites of a complete reply and his or her rights under 37 CFR 1.141.
Therefore, the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 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.
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hegde et al, US Patent (US 2021/0091655 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Hegde et al discloses a bridge rectifier circuit (30) configured to receive an alternating current (AC) voltage and generate a direct current (DC) voltage (claims 2,4,8,9) (See Figs 3-7), the bridge rectifier circuit (30) comprising:
a plurality of rectifying transistors (Q1-Q4) (see Fig 3, par. [0017]-[0025]); and
voltage control circuitry (control circuit, HSD1-2, LSD1-2) configured to output an intermediate voltage to a terminal of a rectifying transistor (Q1-Q4) (see Fig 3, par. [0017]-[0025]),
wherein the intermediate voltage prevents a voltage difference across the terminal from exceeding a maximum voltage rating of the rectifying transistor (Q1-Q4) (see Fig 3, par. [0025], [0029], see reproduced Fig 3 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
671
509
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in addition, while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (The absence of a disclosure in a prior art reference relating to function did not defeat the Board's finding of anticipation of claimed apparatus because the limitations at issue were found to be inherent in the prior art reference); see also In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29 (CCPA 1971); In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959). "Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). (see MPEP 2114).
Furthermore, it has been held that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Exparte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). (See MPEP 2114)).
Regarding Claim 2, Hegde et al discloses the bridge rectifier circuit of Claim 1, wherein an alternating current is received across a first AC input (AC1) and a second AC input (AC2), the bridge rectifier circuit (30) further comprising:
a high side portion (CBoot1, D1, HSD1, Q1, Q2, HSD2, D2, CBoot2) comprising:
a first high side transistor (Q1) (see Fig 3, par. [0017]); and
a second high side transistor (Q2) (see Fig 3, par. [0017]),
wherein the high side portion (CBoot1, D1, HSD1, Q1, Q2, HSD2, D2, CBoot2) is configured to generate the DC voltage (VRECT) (see Fig 3, claims 2,4,8,9); and
a low side portion comprising (LSD1, Q3, Q4, LSD2):
a first low side transistor (Q3) (see Fig 3, par. [0017]); and
a second low side transistor (Q4) (see Fig 3, par. [0017]), wherein the low side portion is configured to connect to an electrical ground reference (see ground reference between Q3 and Q4 in Fig 3, par. [0017]).
Regarding Claim 3, Hegde et al discloses the bridge rectifier circuit of claim 2, wherein a first high side voltage control circuitry (HSD1) is electrically connected to a terminal of the first high side transistor (Q1) (see Fig 3, par. [0017]), and
wherein a second high side voltage control circuitry (HSD2) is electrically connected to a terminal of the second high side transistor (see Fig 3, par. [0017]).
Regarding Claim 4, Hegde et al discloses the bridge rectifier circuit of Claim 3, wherein the first high side transistor (Q1) is configured in a diode configuration, wherein a drain terminal of the first high side transistor (Q1) is electrically connected to a gate terminal of the first high side transistor (Q1) (see Fig 3 in which discloses the electrical connections, in particular a diode configuration, wherein a drain terminal of the first high side transistor (Q1) is electrically connected to a gate terminal of the first high side transistor (Q1), also see par. [0017]).
Regarding Claim 5, Hegde et al discloses the bridge rectifier circuit of Claim 4, wherein the first high side voltage control circuitry (HSD1) is electrically connected to a source terminal (AC1) of the first high side transistor (Q1), and wherein the first high side voltage control circuitry (HSD1) generates a first high side intermediate voltage at the source terminal (AC1) of the first high side transistor (Q1) based at least in part on the first AC input (AC1) and the DC voltage (VRECT) (see Fig 3, par. [0017]).
Regarding Claim 6, Hegde et al discloses the bridge rectifier circuit of Claim 5, wherein in an instance in which the first AC input (AC1) is below a minimum input voltage, the first high side voltage control circuitry (HSD1) generates a first high side intermediate voltage at the source terminal of the first high side transistor (Q1), wherein the difference between the first AC input (AC1) and the first high side intermediate voltage is less than a first high side maximum voltage rating of the first high side transistor (Q1) (see Fig 3 and par. [0021],[0025], [0029]).
Regarding Claim 7, Hegde et al discloses the bridge rectifier circuit of Claim 5, wherein in an instance in which the first AC input (AC1) is above a maximum output voltage, the first high side voltage control circuitry (HSD1) exhibits a negligible voltage drop across the first high side voltage control circuitry (HSD1) (see Fig 3 and par. [0021],[0025], [0029]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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 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.
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.
7. Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hegde et al, US Patent (US 2021/0091655 A1) in view of Hwang US Patent Application Publication (US 2019/0006954 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Hegde et al discloses the bridge rectifier circuity of Claim 5;
Hegde et al does not clearly discloses wherein the first high side voltage control circuitry comprises a first high side voltage control transistor, wherein a drain terminal of the first high side voltage control transistor is electrically connected to a drain terminal of the first high side transistor, wherein a source terminal of the first high side voltage control transistor is electrically connected to the DC voltage, and wherein the gate terminal of the first high side voltage control transistor is configured to receive a first modified AC component voltage based at least in part on the first AC input and the DC voltage.
However, Hwang is an analogous art pertinent to the problem to be solved in this application in which discloses a synchronous bridge rectifier and operation thereof (see Figs 3-10), in which discloses a synchronous bridge rectifier 100 including multiple controller units (U1-U4) per each transistor (M1-M4) and further discloses wherein the first high side voltage control circuitry (250) comprises a first high side voltage control transistor (M6), wherein a drain terminal of the first high side voltage control transistor (250) is electrically connected to a drain terminal of the first high side transistor, wherein a source terminal of the first high side voltage control transistor is electrically connected to the DC voltage, and wherein the gate terminal of the first high side voltage control transistor is configured to receive a first modified AC component voltage based at least in part on the first AC input and the DC voltage (see Fig 7; par. [0054]-[0070]).
Therefore, when both references are combined, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hegde et al with the teachings of Hwang by including wherein the first high side voltage control circuitry comprises a first high side voltage control transistor, wherein a drain terminal of the first high side voltage control transistor is electrically connected to a drain terminal of the first high side transistor, wherein a source terminal of the first high side voltage control transistor is electrically connected to the DC voltage, and wherein the gate terminal of the first high side voltage control transistor is configured to receive a first modified AC component voltage based at least in part on the first AC input and the DC voltage in order to provide a synchronous bridge rectifier, methods of operation thereof and components thereof. In an embodiment, a synchronous bridge rectifier comprises a plurality of synchronously switched elements (e.g., field-effect transistors) and a plurality of controller circuits, one for each of the synchronously switched elements. Each controller circuit is configured to sense voltage across the corresponding synchronously switched element to control opening and closing of the synchronously switched element so as to rectify the alternating current input signal to form a direct current output signal. The controller circuits preferably operate independently of the others without centralized control (Hwang, par. [0007]).
Regarding Claim 9, Hegde et al in view of Hwang discloses the bridge rectifier circuitry of Claim 8, Hwang further discloses wherein the first modified AC component voltage remains above a minimum high side voltage control transistor voltage (see Fig 7; par. [0005],[0037],[0039],[0040],[0054]-[0070]).
Therefore, when both references are combined, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hegde et al with the teachings of Hwang by including wherein the first modified AC component voltage remains above a minimum high side voltage control transistor voltage in order to provide a synchronous bridge rectifier, methods of operation thereof and components thereof. In an embodiment, a synchronous bridge rectifier comprises a plurality of synchronously switched elements (e.g., field-effect transistors) and a plurality of controller circuits, one for each of the synchronously switched elements. Each controller circuit is configured to sense voltage across the corresponding synchronously switched element to control opening and closing of the synchronously switched element so as to rectify the alternating current input signal to form a direct current output signal. The controller circuits preferably operate independently of the others without centralized control (Hwang, par. [0007]).
Regarding Claim 10, Hegde et al in view of Hwang discloses the bridge rectifier circuity of Claim 9, Hwang further discloses wherein a gate minimum voltage generator circuitry (Vref1, Vref2) generates a gate minimum voltage based at least in part on a voltage difference between the DC voltage and the electrical ground (see Fig 3-7; par. [0054]-[0070]).
Therefore, when both references are combined, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hegde et al with the teachings of Hwang by including wherein a gate minimum voltage generator circuitry generates a gate minimum voltage based at least in part on a voltage difference between the DC voltage and the electrical ground in order to provide a synchronous bridge rectifier, methods of operation thereof and components thereof. In an embodiment, a synchronous bridge rectifier comprises a plurality of synchronously switched elements (e.g., field-effect transistors) and a plurality of controller circuits, one for each of the synchronously switched elements. Each controller circuit is configured to sense voltage across the corresponding synchronously switched element to control opening and closing of the synchronously switched element so as to rectify the alternating current input signal to form a direct current output signal. The controller circuits preferably operate independently of the others without centralized control (Hwang, par. [0007]).
Regarding Claim 11, Hegde et al in view of Hwang discloses the bridge rectifier circuitry of Claim 10, Hwang further discloses wherein the minimum high side voltage control transistor voltage is based at least in part on the gate minimum voltage generated based at least in part on the DC voltage (see Fig 3-7; par. [0054]-[0070]).
Therefore, when both references are combined, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hegde et al with the teachings of Hwang by including wherein the minimum high side voltage control transistor voltage is based at least in part on the gate minimum voltage generated based at least in part on the DC voltage in order to provide a synchronous bridge rectifier, methods of operation thereof and components thereof. In an embodiment, a synchronous bridge rectifier comprises a plurality of synchronously switched elements (e.g., field-effect transistors) and a plurality of controller circuits, one for each of the synchronously switched elements. Each controller circuit is configured to sense voltage across the corresponding synchronously switched element to control opening and closing of the synchronously switched element so as to rectify the alternating current input signal to form a direct current output signal. The controller circuits preferably operate independently of the others without centralized control (Hwang, par. [0007]).
Regarding Claim 12, Hegde et al in view of Hwang discloses the bridge rectifier circuitry of Claim 8, Hwang further discloses wherein the first high side voltage control circuitry further comprises intermediate voltage discharge circuitry configured to discharge the first high side intermediate voltage based at least in part on the first AC input (see Fig 3-7; par. [0054]-[0070]).
Therefore, when both references are combined, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hegde et al with the teachings of Hwang by including wherein the first high side voltage control circuitry further comprises intermediate voltage discharge circuitry configured to discharge the first high side intermediate voltage based at least in part on the first AC input in order to provide a synchronous bridge rectifier, methods of operation thereof and components thereof. In an embodiment, a synchronous bridge rectifier comprises a plurality of synchronously switched elements (e.g., field-effect transistors) and a plurality of controller circuits, one for each of the synchronously switched elements. Each controller circuit is configured to sense voltage across the corresponding synchronously switched element to control opening and closing of the synchronously switched element so as to rectify the alternating current input signal to form a direct current output signal. The controller circuits preferably operate independently of the others without centralized control (Hwang, par. [0007]).
Regarding Claim 13, Hegde et al in view of Hwang discloses the bridge rectifier circuitry of Claim 10, Hwang further discloses wherein the first modified AC component voltage is generated by a modified AC component generator circuitry (see Fig 3-7; par. [0054]-[0070]).
Therefore, when both references are combined, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hegde et al with the teachings of Hwang by including wherein the first modified AC component voltage is generated by a modified AC component generator circuitry in order to provide a synchronous bridge rectifier, methods of operation thereof and components thereof. In an embodiment, a synchronous bridge rectifier comprises a plurality of synchronously switched elements (e.g., field-effect transistors) and a plurality of controller circuits, one for each of the synchronously switched elements. Each controller circuit is configured to sense voltage across the corresponding synchronously switched element to control opening and closing of the synchronously switched element so as to rectify the alternating current input signal to form a direct current output signal. The controller circuits preferably operate independently of the others without centralized control (Hwang, par. [0007]).
Regarding Claim 14, Hegde et al in view of Hwang discloses the bridge rectifier circuitry of Claim 13, Hwang further discloses wherein the first modified AC component generator circuitry generates the first modified AC component voltage based at least in part on the gate minimum voltage generated by the gate minimum voltage generator circuitry, the first AC input, and a first bulk voltage generated by a bulk voltage generator circuitry (see Fig 3-7; par. [0054]-[0070]).
Therefore, when both references are combined, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hegde et al with the teachings of Hwang by including wherein the first modified AC component generator circuitry generates the first modified AC component voltage based at least in part on the gate minimum voltage generated by the gate minimum voltage generator circuitry, the first AC input, and a first bulk voltage generated by a bulk voltage generator circuitry in order to provide a synchronous bridge rectifier. In an embodiment, a synchronous bridge rectifier comprises a plurality of synchronously switched elements (e.g., FE transistors) and a plurality of controller circuits, one for each of the synchronously switched elements. Each controller circuit is configured to sense voltage across the corresponding synchronously switched element to control opening and closing of the synchronously switched element so as to rectify the alternating current input signal to form a direct current output signal. The controller circuits preferably operate independently of the others without centralized control (Hwang, par. [0007]).
Examiner Note
8. The examiner cites particular columns and lines numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant 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.
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the cited prior art in the PTO-892 form attached.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFONSO PEREZ BORROTO whose telephone number is (571) 270-1714. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (9am-4pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rexford Barnie can be reached on (571) 272-7492. 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. /ALFONSO PEREZ BORROTO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836