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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
In response to the last Office Action mailed on 04/10/2014, Applicant has canceled claims 14, 16-18, and 20, and amended claims 1- 4, 6, and 19. Accordingly, the claims are enabled and definite within the meaning of 35 USC § 112(a) and (b), respectively; thus, 35 USC § 112 (a) and (b) rejections are withdrawn. Thus, claims 1-13, 15, and 19 are currently pending in the subject application.
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. First of all, and foe the purpose of correcting the record; Applicant submitted in page 7 of the arguments filed 11/04/2025: “in the Office Action it was acknowledged that White does not teach the period of the drive signal varies within a preset period range.” However, Examiner’s statement cited on page 6 of the office action mailed 08/15/2025, duplicated herein: “White discloses that a period of the drive signal varies proportionally to the frequency at which the electric motor is controlled by the controller 230; however, it does not teach the period of the drive signal varies randomly within a preset period range” does not concede what Applicant submitted in the above argument. Examiner clearly stated that White does not teach the period of the drive signal varies randomly within a preset period range. Hence, Applicant' s argument is moot.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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)(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 1-13, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over White et al. (US 20160020443 A1).
Re. claims 1 and 19, A power tool (Fig. 1B), comprising:
a housing (¶. [0028]);
an electric motor disposed in the housing (¶. [0028]);
a current detection module (state 290 in Fig. 11C) configured to acquire a current value of the electric motor in real time (“With reference to FIG. 11C, the controller 230 enforces the current limit by measuring current periodically (e.g., every 5 microseconds) at 290 and comparing instantaneous current measures to the current limit at 291” ¶. [0630]);
a driver circuit (element 226 in fig. 10 A-C) comprising a plurality of electronic switches (UH, VH, WH, UL, VL, WL), selectively providing electrical signals to drive the electric motor (¶. [0120]); and
a control module (control unit 208) electrically connected to the driver circuit (226) and configured to
acquire a grid voltage of the electric motor (Fig. 14D shows the control unit configured to optimized the drive signals; conduction band, according to the acquire various input voltage levels which include grid voltage of the electric motor as AC power line),
use the grid voltage to determine a time period for each of a series of drive signal time intervals (“The control circuit may optimize a range of pulse-width-modulation according to the rated voltages of the AC power supply and the DC power supply so that the motor substantially the same output speed performance when operating using the AC power supply and the DC power supply” ¶. [0023]),
turn off an on-state electronic switch among the plurality of electronic switches within a remaining time period of each one of the series of drive signal time intervals (“If the instantaneous current measure exceeds the current limit, the controller 230 deactivates power switch circuit 226 switches at 292 for remainder of present time interval and thereby interrupts current flowing to the electric motor” ¶. [0630]) when the current value acquired by the current detection module exceeds a preset current threshold (291 and 292 in Fig. 11C), and
turn on an electronic switch (294 in Fig. 11C) among the plurality of electronic switches which is controlled by the control module (signals UH, VH, WH, UL, VL, WL) at present to be on when the time period of each one of the series of drive signal time intervals ends (“when the end of the present time interval is reached, the controller 230 reactivates power switch circuit 226 switches at 294 and thereby resumes current flow to the motor for the next cycle” ¶. [0630]; Yes to 293 in Fig. 11C); wherein
the determined time period for each of the series of drive signal time intervals is varied within a present period range when the grid voltage is higher than a threshold (Fig. 14D shows the control unit configured to optimized the drive signals; conduction band, according to the acquire various input voltage levels which include grid voltage of the electric motor as AC power line.)
Re. claims 2- 6, White discloses that a period of the drive signal varies proportionally to the frequency at which the electric motor is controlled by the controller 230; however, it does not teach the period of the drive signal varies randomly within a preset period range following a law of a normal distribution, the preset current threshold satisfies a variation law of a preset waveform such as a triangular waveform or a curve. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to letting the period of the drive signal change under no control taking any value random distribution or the current threshold satisfies a preset waveform such as a triangular waveform or a curve which will be an obvious feature that does not require any programing or control in order to realize independency with regard to the system parameters.
Re. claims 7- 12, see White, Figs. 10B-C and ¶. [0629]. White discloses the claimed invention except for the value and the characteristic of the circuit component such as the capacitor is an electrolytic capacitor to rated power of the electric motor is higher than 20 μF/kW and lower than 80 μF/kW. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to choose these value and characteristics. The Examiner considers that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide the motor parts with predetermined characteristics as necessitated by the specific requirements of the particular application because it would tune the motor to comply with predetermined design constraints; furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233; also it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Re. claim 13, ¶. [0110].
Re. claim 15, White disclose a rotational speed detection module (238) configured to acquire a rotational speed of the electric motor and a position of a rotor of the electric motor (¶. [0596]).
Conclusion
5. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SAID BOUZIANE whose telephone number is (571)272-7592. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00-15:00.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.
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.
/SAID BOUZIANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846