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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This final Office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 12/17/2025. Applicant previously elected species 1 and sub-species 1 (claims 1-5, 7, 10-13 and 16-25) and withdrew species 2-8 and sub-species 2-5 (claims 6, 8-9 and 14-15). Moreover, claims 11-12, 19-20 and 24-25 are also withdrawn as being drawn to a nonelected species. Applicant currently amended claims 1-2, 4-5, 7 and 23; cancelled claims 8-9 and added new claim 26. Therefore, claims 1-5, 7, 10, 13, 16-18, 21-23 and 26 are presented for examination and are rejected for the reasons indicated herein below.
Election/Restrictions
2. Claims 6 and 14-15 are withdrawn by Applicant from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/31/2025. Additionally, claims 11-12, 19-20 and 24-25 are also withdrawn by the Examiner as being drawn to a nonelected species.
Claim Objections
3. Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 23, lines 3-4, recites “each of the bridge converter legs being each configured to” it should be changed to “each of the bridge converter legs being . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
5. Claims 1 and 23 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. For instance;
In claim 1, and similarly in claim 23, the limitation “wherein a resonant frequency of each resonant tank is tuned to within +/- 50% of the switching frequency” is indefinite. It’s unclear what Applicant meant by “within +/- 50%”. The plus (+) and minus (-) signs are mathematical equations that are used for formulas and the use of them in these limitations is not clear. Therefore, these limitations should be rewritten and clarified as specifically defined in the specification. For the purpose of examination, these limitations will be read broadly until specifically defined. Examiner’s note: As long as the resonant frequency of each resonant tank is approximately half of the switching frequency then these limitations are taught. (One possible way to fix this limitation is to say “wherein a resonant frequency of each resonant tank is tuned to ).
6. Dependent claims 2-5, 7, 10, 13, 16-18, 21-22 and 26 inherit the deficiency of independent claim 1, thus they are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 7, 10, 13, 16-18, 21-23 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0180350 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0238876 A1).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood by the examiner, Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) discloses “A multi-phase resonant power converter (e.g. see Figs. 1-13), comprising: a power stage on a primary side of the multi-phase resonant power converter, the power stage comprising a plurality of bridge converter legs each configured to implement a separate phase of the multi-phase resonant power converter (e.g. Figs. 1-13, see a power stage on a primary side of the multi-phase resonant power converter, comprising a plurality of bridge converter legs each configured to implement a separate phase of the multi-phase resonant power converter. Implicit); a transformer device having a primary side winding for each bridge converter leg of the power stage, and a secondary side winding for each primary side winding (e.g. Figs. 1-13, see the transformer and its primary and secondary windings and their connections. Implicit); a power circuit electrically connected to the secondary side windings of the transformer device on a secondary side of the multi-phase resonant power converter (e.g. Figs. 1-13, see the power circuit electrically connected to the secondary side windings of the transformer device. Implicit); a primary-side controller configured to operate the bridge converter legs of the power stage at a switching frequency (e.g. Figs. 1-13, see controller 91, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131. Implicit); and a separate resonant tank electrically connected to a midpoint of each bridge converter leg of the power stage, each resonant tank comprising a resonant capacitor in series with the primary side winding for the corresponding bridge converter leg, wherein a resonant frequency of each resonant tank is tuned to within +/- 50% of the switching frequency (e.g. Figs. 1-13, see Cr1, Cr2, Cr3, and Lr1-Lr3 and their connections, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131. Implicit)”. Huang et al. does not appear to explicitly disclose that the power stage having the plurality of bridge converter legs “wherein each of the bridge converter legs is configured to receive a same AC input voltage or a separate phase of the AC input voltage”. However, Zhang et al. shows that the plurality of bridge converter legs “wherein each of the bridge converter legs is configured to receive a same AC input voltage or a separate phase of the AC input voltage (Zhang et al., e.g. see at least Figs. 1 and 16-20, see 9-11, also see para. 0056)”. Replacing the primary side bridge of Huang et al. with the primary side power stage (11) having three AC input sources (9) of Zhang et al. would have constituted a mere arrangement of old elements with each performing their known function, the combination yielding no more than one would expect from such an arrangement. Therefore, it would have been an obvious design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the primary side bridge of Huang et al. with the primary side power stage (11) having three AC input source (9) of Zhang et al. for the purpose of enabling the power converter to be used with AC input sources. Also for the purpose of making the device more widely usable.
Regarding claim 2, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein each bridge converter leg of the power stage comprises a plurality of switch devices, and wherein the primary-side controller is configured to operate the plurality of switch devices of each bridge converter leg at a constant switching frequency between a voltage space vector in phase with a voltage space vector of the AC input voltage and a voltage space vector that is shifted 180 deg. from the voltage space vector of the AC input voltage (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131; also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 9, 11 and 20-24, also see para. 0039, para. 0056-0064, para. 0074 and para. 0085-0089. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 3, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein a secondary-side controller is configured to control the power circuit by space-vector modulation to apply a voltage on the secondary side, such that power is driven through one or more of the resonant tanks on the primary side in each positive and negative primary-side half-switching period of the power stage (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see the power circuit and controller 91, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131; also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 20-24, also see para. 0039, para. 0056-0064, para. 0074 and para. 0085-0089. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 4, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein the secondary-side controller is configured to adjust a voltage vector applied on the secondary side by the space- vector modulation, to control power flow on the secondary side (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see the power circuit and controller 91, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131; also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 20-24, also see para. 0039, para. 0056-0064, para. 0074 and para. 0085-0089. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 5, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein each bridge converter leg of the power stage is configured to receive a separate phase of the AC input voltage and comprises a single pair of bidirectional switch devices electrically connected in a half bridge configuration, and wherein the primary-side controller is configured to operate the bridge converter legs of the power stage in synchronization under PWM (pulse width modulation) control with 50% duty cycle (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see controller 91, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131; also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 9-11 and 20-24, also see para. 0039, para. 0056-0064, para. 0074 and para. 0085-0089. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 7, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein each bridge converter leg of the power stage is configured to receive a separate phase of the AC input voltage and comprises a single pair of power switch devices having unidirectional voltage blocking capability and electrically connected in a half bridge configuration or two pairs of power switch devices having unidirectional voltage blocking capability and electrically connected in a full bridge configuration, wherein the multi-phase resonant power converter has P phases and P is a positive integer greater than or equal to 2, and wherein the primary-side controller is configured to operate the bridge converter legs of the power stage in synchronization under PWM (pulse width modulation) control with 50% duty cycle (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see controller 91, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131; also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 9-11 and 20-24, also see para. 0028-0029, para. 0039, para. 0056-0064, para. 0070-0074, para. 0085-0089 and para. 0134-0315. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 10, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein each bridge converter leg of the power stage is a half bridge converter leg comprising: an actively controlled leg formed by two power switch devices electrically connected in series at the midpoint of the bridge converter leg; and a capacitive leg in parallel with the actively controlled leg (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see the power stage and controller 91, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131; also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 9, 11 and 20-24, also see para. 0028-0029, para. 0039, para. 0056-0064, para. 0070-0074, para. 0085-0089 and para. 0134-0315. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 13, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein the power circuit comprises an actively switched half or full bridge rectification leg for each phase of the multi-phase resonant power converter, and wherein a secondary-side controller is configured to control the actively switched half or full bridge rectification legs of the power circuit by space-vector modulation such that quasi-resonant currents flow in the primary side windings and the secondary side windings of the transformer device (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see the power circuit and controller 91, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131; also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 20-24, also see para. 0028-0029, para. 0039, para. 0056-0064, para. 0070-0074, para. 0085-0089 and para. 0134-0315. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 16, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein the multi-phase resonant power converter has P phases and P is a positive integer greater than or equal to 2, and wherein the power circuit comprises M half or full bridge rectification legs and M is a positive integer greater than or equal to P+1 (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see the power circuit and controller 91, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131; also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 20-24, also see para. 0028-0029, para. 0039, para. 0056-0064, para. 0070-0074, para. 0085-0089 and para. 0134-0315. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 17, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein each bridge converter leg of the power stage comprises a single pair of switch devices electrically connected in a half bridge configuration or two pairs of switch devices electrically connected in a full bridge configuration, and wherein for each bridge converter leg of the power stage, a voltage rating of each switch device included in the bridge converter leg of the power stage is defined by a phase-to-neutral voltage of the AC input voltage (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see the power stage and controller 91, also see the abstract, para. 0040, para. 0083-0086 and para. 0117-0131; also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 9, 11 and 20-24, also see para. 0028-0029, para. 0039, para. 0056-0064, para. 0070-0074, para. 0085-0089 and para. 0134-0315. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 18, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein the primary side windings and the secondary side windings of the transformer device are integrated with a single magnetic structure (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see the transformer and its primary and secondary windings and their connections in at least Fig. 7. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 21, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein the power circuit comprises a separate half or full bridge rectification leg for each phase of the power stage, wherein the bridge converter legs of the power stage are connected to the primary side windings of the transformer device in a Y-configuration or a delta-configuration, and wherein the half or full bridge rectification legs of the power circuit are connected to the secondary side windings of the transformer device in a Y-configuration or a delta-configuration (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see the power stage, the resonant tank, the transformer, the power circuit and their connections, also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 9, 11. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 22, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein the power circuit comprises a separate half or full bridge rectification leg for each phase of the power stage, wherein the half or full bridge rectification legs are electrically connected in parallel to form a single DC output of the power circuit, and wherein the primary side windings and the secondary side windings of the transformer device are integrated with a single magnetic structure (Huang, e.g. see Figs. 1-13, see the power stage, the resonant tank, the power circuit, the transformer and its primary and secondary windings and their connections in at least Fig. 7, also see Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 9, 11. Implicit)”.
Regarding claim 26, as best understood by the examiner, the combination of Huang et al. (e.g. see Figs. 1-13) and Zhang et al. discloses “wherein each of the bridge converter legs is configured to receive a separate phase of the AC input voltage across the corresponding bridge converter leg (Zhang et al., e.g. Figs. 1-20, see 9, 11. Each leg of the primary side bridge indeed receives a separate phase of the AC input voltage. Implicit)”.
Regarding method claim 23; it comprises substantially same subject matter as in the recited apparatus claims 1-5, 7, 10, 13, 16-18, 21-22 and 26, therefore method claim 23 is also rejected under the same ground of rejection as clearly discussed in the rejection to the apparatus claims 1-5, 7, 10, 13, 16-18, 21-22 and 26. Also the method steps will be met during the normal operation of the apparatus described above. (Examiner notes: For method claims, note that under MPEP 2112.02, the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore the previous rejections based on the apparatus will not be repeated).
Response to Argument(s)
8. Applicant's argument(s) filed on 12/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive and also the claims submitted on 12/17/2025 are also rejected in view of the same grounds of rejection.
In the remarks,
Applicant argues in the response that:
The combination of Huang et al. and Zhang et al. does not disclose the features of “a power stage on a primary side of the multi-phase resonant power converter, the power stage comprising a plurality of bridge converter legs, wherein each of the bridge converter legs is configured to receive a same AC input voltage or a separate phase of the AC input voltage and implement a separate phase of the multi-phase resonant power converter” as recited in Applicant’s claim 1 and similarly in claim 23.
In response to argument(s):
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded that claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation.
Also in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show non-obviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Also, it is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in its 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.
Similarly, in response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Moreover, in response to applicant's argument that none of the above-mentioned references disclose the above-mentioned limitations, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
Therefore, the combination of Huang et al. and Zhang et al. clearly discloses all the claimed limitations based on the broadest reasonable interpretation. The limitations “a power stage on a primary side of the multi-phase resonant power converter, the power stage comprising a plurality of bridge converter legs, wherein each of the bridge converter legs is configured to receive a same AC input voltage or a separate phase of the AC input voltage and implement a separate phase of the multi-phase resonant power converter”, as recited in Applicant's claim 1 and similarly in claim 23, are in fact still read on the combination of Huang et al. and Zhang et al., for example, (Huang et al. shows “a power stage on a primary side of the multi-phase resonant power converter, the power stage comprising a plurality of bridge converter legs each configured to implement a separate phase of the multi-phase resonant power converter (e.g. Figs. 1-13, see a power stage on a primary side of the multi-phase resonant power converter, comprising a plurality of bridge converter legs each configured to implement a separate phase of the multi-phase resonant power converter. Implicit)”. Huang et al. does not appear to explicitly disclose that the power stage having the plurality of bridge converter legs “wherein each of the bridge converter legs is configured to receive a same AC input voltage or a separate phase of the AC input voltage”. However, Zhang et al. shows that the plurality of bridge converter legs “wherein each of the bridge converter legs is configured to receive a same AC input voltage or a separate phase of the AC input voltage (Zhang et al., e.g. see at least Figs. 1 and 16-20, see 9-11, also see para. 0056)”. Replacing the primary side bridge of Huang et al. with the primary side power stage (11) having three AC input sources (9) of Zhang et al. would have constituted a mere arrangement of old elements with each performing their known function, the combination yielding no more than one would expect from such an arrangement. Therefore, it would have been an obvious design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the primary side bridge of Huang et al. with the primary side power stage (11) having three AC input source (9) of Zhang et al. for the purpose of enabling the power converter to be used with AC input sources. Also for the purpose of making the device more widely usable.
To clarify this further, the combination of Huang et al. and Zhang et al. indeed teaches the argued limitations. Huang et al. teaches a primary side bridge but doesn’t teach the AC input voltage. Zhang et al. indeed teaches the AC input voltage source and the primary side bridge and their connections. Again, as discussed in the rejection above of independent claim 1, and similarly independent claim 23, the combination of Huang et al. and Zhang et al. clearly shows these limitations (see the rejection and response to arguments above). Thus, applicant's arguments are invalid.
Conclusion
9. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
(Also see references:
Woo et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0025867 A1) which discloses a bidirectional converter having the same transformer and secondary side structure as claimed here (e.g. see Fig. 1); and
B. Cerqueira et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0229972 A1) which discloses a bidirectional converter having the same primary side structure with three AC input source as claimed here (e.g. see at least Figs. 1-5)).
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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUSEF A AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-6057. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 11AM-7PM.
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, Crystal can be reached on 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 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.
/YUSEF A AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights