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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1, 4-13 and 15 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the switch" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the applicant is referring to the first switch, the second switch or the (third) switch recited in lines 7 and 12. The term “the switch” does not properly refer back to any specific switch.
Claims 4-12 inherit the same from claim 1.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the switch" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the applicant is referring to the first switch, the second switch or the (third) switch recited in lines 3 and 4. Each switch must be separately and individually labeled in order to avoid confusion when referring back to a specific switch. The term “the switch” does not properly refer back to any specific switch.
Claim 15 inherits the same from clam 13.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 4-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (US 20240120831) in view of Liu et al. (US 6396716).
Claims 1, 6 and 13; Jiang et al. disclose a power converter (figure 6 is a power converter), comprising: a transformer (Np/Ns is a transformer), comprising a primary-side winding (Np is a primary winding) and a secondary-side winding (Ns is a second winding) coupled to the primary-side winding, an inductance-capacitance resonance circuit (Lm, C1 is an inductance capacitance resonance circuit), coupled to the primary-side winding, and the inductance-capacitance resonance circuit comprising a resonance capacitor (C1 is a resonance capacitor) and a resonance inductor (Lm is a resonance inductor), wherein the resonance inductor is a magnetizing inductance of the primary-side winding, a first switch (Q1 is a first switch) and a second switch (Q2 is a second switch) coupled to the first switch, and the first switch and the second switch (are clearly) coupled to the inductance-capacitance resonance circuit, a discharging circuit (134 is a discharging circuit) connected to the resonance capacitor, and the discharging circuit comprising: a resistor (134 comprises Ra, a resistor), and a (third) switch (Sa is switch comprised within 134) (and is) connected to the resistor in series to form a series-connected branch, and a controller (120, 130) to complementarily control the first switch and the second switch to be turned on and turned off; wherein when the power converter is not supplied power by an input power source the first switch and the second switch would be OFF, and Sa is turned so that energy accumulated in the resonance capacitor is released through the series-connected branch.
However, Jiang et al do not expressly disclose whether the controller is configured to receive an output voltage feedback signal of the power converter to control the first switch and the second according to the output voltage feedback signal so as to adjust an output voltage of the power converter.
Liu et al. teach that it is common practice to provide a controller that senses the output voltage through a feedback circuit in order to control the duty cycle of the switches on the primary side so that adjustment to the duty cycle based on the feedback ensures keeping the output voltage undisturbed by voltage variations.
Therefore, it would have been wholly obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify Jiang et al. to include a controller that is configured to receive an output voltage feedback signal of a power converter to control a first switch and a second according to the output voltage feedback signal so as to adjust an output voltage of the power converter in order to control the duty cycle of the switches so that adjustments to the duty cycle ensures keeping the output voltage undisturbed by voltage variations as taught by Liu et al.
Claim 4; Q2, Lm, C1.
Claim 5; Switch Q1 would be first switch and Q2 second. Thus, Q2, Lm, C1. E.g. see figs 1a and 1b.
Claims 7 and 14; fig. 1a: with Q1 as second switch, Q2 first switch; Q2 - OFF, Q1 - ON, Sa - OFF Lm is charged. Q2 - ON, Q1 - OFF, Sa - OFF, Lm resonates and transfers energy.
Claims 8, 9 and 15; abstract; also with discharge circuit 134, C1 would be zero on restart.
Claim 10; fig. 1b: with Q1 as second switch, Q2 first switch; Q2 - OFF, Q1 - ON, Sa - OFF Lm is charged. Q2 - ON, Q1 - OFF, Sa - OFF, Lm resonates and transfers energy.
Claim 11; Sa, Ra.
Claim 12; discharge 134,C1 would be zero on restart.
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 GARY L LAXTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2079. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 am-4 pm.
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, Crystal Hammond 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.
/GARY L LAXTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838 3/04/2026