DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,643,420. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,643,420 anticipate all of the instant claim limitations, literally or in what amounts to a rewording.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-8, 12-16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubo et al. US Patent 6,297,616 in view of Jang et al. US PGPUB 2017/0203658.
Regarding claim 1, Kubo discloses a system [fig. 1] comprising:
an alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC) converter (AC-DC converter), the AC-DC converter connectable to a line voltage [figs. 1 & 12, AC-DC converter 104 connected to power source 101; column 4, line 67-column 5, line 12; column 10, lines 11-17]; and
a DC to DC converter (DC-DC converter) connected to the AC-DC converter [fig. 12; converter 3], the DC-DC converter including:
a first voltage converter having a secondary side connectable to a first battery [fig. 12; converters Q1-QN for batteries E1-EN; column 10, lines 11-18 and lines 30-67];
a second voltage converter having a secondary side connectable to a second battery [fig. 12; converters Q1-QN for batteries E1-EN; column 10, lines 11-18 and lines 30-67];
a first voltage converter having a secondary side connectable to a first battery [fig. 12; converters Q1-QN for batteries E1-EN; column 10, lines 11-18 and lines 30-67];
a second low voltage converter having a secondary side connectable to a second battery [fig. 12; converters Q1-QN for batteries E1-EN; column 10, lines 11-18 and lines 30-67]; and
one or more transformers having a primary side connected to the AC-DC converter [fig. 12; a transformer 8 with a primary side connected to converter 104] and a secondary side connected to each of a primary side of the first high voltage buck-boost converter, a primary side of the second high voltage buck-boost converter, a primary side of the first low voltage buck-boost converter, and a primary side of the second low voltage buck-boost converter [fig. 8; each converter Q is connected to a secondary side of transformer 8].
Kubo does not explicitly disclose the converters are buck-boost converters.
Kubo does not explicitly disclose the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage.
However, Jang discloses an electric vehicle charging system wherein the converters are buck-boost converters [pars. 40-41] and wherein the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage [par. 3 & 31-32; high voltage battery 10 and high voltage converter 60 and low voltage battery 20 and low voltage converter 70].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kubo to further include wherein the converters are buck-boost converters for the purpose of controlling the current flow as needed, as taught by Jang (pars. 40-41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kubo to further include wherein the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage for the purpose of charging both a battery for providing electricity to low voltage loads and the engine in an electric vehicle, as taught by Jang (pars. 3-4, 10 and 12-13).
Regarding claim 2, Kubo discloses wherein the DC-DC converter further includes: a first high voltage bridge rectifier connected to the secondary side of the one or more transformers and the primary side of the first high voltage converter; a second high voltage bridge rectifier connected to the secondary side of the one or more transformers and the primary side of the second high voltage converter; a first low voltage bridge rectifier connected to the secondary side of the one or more transformers and the primary side of the first low voltage converter; and a second low voltage bridge rectifier connected to the secondary side of the one or more transformers and the primary side of the second low voltage converter [fig. 8 & 12; (fig. 12 is a modification of fig. 8, but the description of the bridge converters 315-335 applies); column 8, lines 65-column 9, line 10; column 11, line 11-44].
Kubo does not explicitly disclose the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage or wherein the converters are buck-boost.
However, Jang as applied in claim 1 discloses the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage and wherein the converters are buck-boost.
Regarding claims 3 and 15, Kubo discloses further comprising: one or more controllers [fig. 12, controller 307; column 10, line 57-column 11, line 47] configured to control an operation of the first converter, the second converter, the first converter, and the second converter to control a power transfer between two or more of the line voltage, the first battery, the second battery, the first battery, or the second battery [column 10, line 57-column 11, line 47; the controller 307 controls power between the batteries and the line voltage, bidirectionally].
Kubo does not explicitly disclose the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage or wherein the converters are buck-boost.
However, Jang as applied in claim 1 discloses the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage and wherein the converters are buck-boost.
Regarding claim 4, Kubo wherein: the first converter includes one or more first switches, the second converter includes one or more second switches, the first converter includes one or more first switches, and the second converter includes one or more second switches [fig. 12, switches G11-GN4].
Kubo does not explicitly disclose the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage or wherein the converters are buck-boost.
However, Jang as applied in claim 1 discloses the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage and wherein the converters are buck-boost.
Regarding claim 7, Kubo discloses wherein the primary side of the one or more transformers includes: two or more primary windings connected in series, or two or more primary windings connected in parallel [fig. 1 & 12; a plurality of primary windings in series]
Regarding claim 8, Kubo discloses wherein the DC-DC converter further includes: a bridge driver having a primary side connected to the AC-DC converter and a secondary side connected to the one or more transformers [fig. 12; bridge driver 104 connected to converter 109 and a secondary side connected to transformer 8; column 10, lines 11-44].
Regarding claim 12, Kubo discloses further comprising:
the first battery connected to the DC-DC converter; the second battery connected to the DC-DC converter; the first battery connected to the DC-DC converter; and the second battery connected to the DC-DC converter [fig. 12; batteries 1-N connected to converters Q1-QN] wherein the system is provided as a bidirectional battery charger [column 10, lines 11-15] configured to:
receive input AC power from the line voltage through the AC-DC converter [figs. 1 & 12, AC-DC converter 104 connected to power source 101; column 4, line 67-column 5, line 12; column 10, lines 11-17];
convert the input AC power to output DC power [fig. 12; converter 3; column 4, line 67-column 5, line 12; column 10, lines 11-17], and
supply the output DC power to charge one or more of the first battery, the second battery, the first battery, or the second battery in a grid-to-battery operation [column 10, lines 30-44], and receive input DC power from one or more of the first battery, the second battery, the battery, or the second battery through the DC-DC converter, convert the input DC power to output AC power [column 10 line 11-column 11, line 46; bidirectional converters].
Kubo does not explicitly disclose the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage or wherein the converters are buck-boost.
However, Jang as applied in claim 1 discloses the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage and wherein the converters are buck-boost.
Kubo does not explicitly disclose supplying the output AC power to a load of the line voltage in a battery-to-grid operation.
However, Examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the electric vehicle charging arts to supply power from the vehicle battery to the AC grid, after converting the power to the necessary voltage and frequency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kubo to further include supplying the output AC power to a load of the line voltage in a battery-to-grid operation for the purpose of generating revenue for a driver and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) which was ready for improvement in order to yield results predictable by one of ordinary skill the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 13, Kubo discloses further comprising: an electric vehicle including the first high voltage battery and the second high voltage battery connected to the DC-DC converter [column 13, lines 55-65].
Regarding claims 14 and 16, Kubo discloses a system comprising:
a DC to DC converter (DC-DC converter) [fig. 12; converter 3] including:
a first voltage converter having a secondary side connectable to a first battery [fig. 12; converters Q1-QN for batteries E1-EN; column 10, lines 11-18 and lines 30-67];
a second voltage converter having a secondary side connectable to a second battery [fig. 12; converters Q1-QN for batteries E1-EN; column 10, lines 11-18 and lines 30-67];
a first voltage converter having a secondary side connectable to a first battery [fig. 12; converters Q1-QN for batteries E1-EN; column 10, lines 11-18 and lines 30-67];
a second low voltage converter having a secondary side connectable to a second battery [fig. 12; converters Q1-QN for batteries E1-EN; column 10, lines 11-18 and lines 30-67]; and
one or more transformers having a primary side connected to the AC-DC converter [fig. 12; a transformer 8 with a primary side connected to converter 104] and a secondary side connected to each of a primary side of the first high voltage buck-boost converter, a primary side of the second high voltage buck-boost converter, a primary side of the first low voltage buck-boost converter, and a primary side of the second low voltage buck-boost converter [fig. 8; each converter Q is connected to a secondary side of transformer 8].
Kubo does not explicitly disclose the converters are buck-boost converters.
Kubo does not explicitly disclose the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage.
However, Jang discloses an electric vehicle charging system wherein the converters are buck-boost converters [pars. 40-41] and wherein the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage [par. 3 & 31-32; high voltage battery 10 and high voltage converter 60 and low voltage battery 20 and low voltage converter 70].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kubo to further include wherein the converters are buck-boost converters for the purpose of controlling the current flow as needed, as taught by Jang (pars. 40-41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kubo to further include wherein the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage for the purpose of charging both a battery for providing electricity to low voltage loads and the engine in an electric vehicle, as taught by Jang (pars. 3-4, 10 and 12-13).
Regarding claim 16, the method steps disclosed therein would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill based on the teachings of the prior art reference(s) applied above, since the prior art of record herein is construed as teaching or suggesting all of the elements recited in the method claim, as pointed out in the above rejection of claim 14. The claim is accordingly rejected.
Regarding claim 18, Kubo discloses wherein the operations further include: controlling the operation of the first converter, the second converter, the first converter, and the second converter based on one or more of a voltage of a line voltage connected to the DC-DC converter, a battery connected to the DC-DC converter, or a power requirement of the DC-DC converter [column 5, lines 22-42; controlled by current requirement (a power requirement)].
Kubo does not explicitly disclose the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage or wherein the converters are buck-boost.
However, Jang as applied in claim 16 discloses the batteries and converters are respectively high voltage and low voltage and wherein the converters are buck-boost.
Regarding claim 20, Kubo discloses the four converters [fig. 12] but does not explicitly disclose wherein the operations further include: controlling the operation of the first converter, the second converter, the first converter, and the second converter to operate the DC-DC converter in a capacitor pre-charge operation.
However, Jang further discloses controlling the operation of the first converter, the second converter, the first converter, and the second converter to operate the DC-DC converter in a capacitor pre-charge operation [fig. 2; capacitors are charged by the outputs of the converters 60 and 70; prior to charging the capacitors operations including switching of the converters happen].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kubo to further include wherein the operations further include: controlling the operation of the first converter, the second converter, the first converter, and the second converter to operate the DC-DC converter in a capacitor pre-charge operation for the purpose of charging the capacitors to stabilize the output, and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) which was ready for improvement in order to yield results predictable by one of ordinary skill the art. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6, 9-11, 17 and 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the Double Patenting rejection(s), set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With respect to claim 5, the following is an examiner's statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to further teach or suggest “wherein one or more controllers among the one or more controllers are further configured to: control an operation of the one or more first high voltage switches, the one or more second high voltage switches, the one or more first low voltage switches, and the one or more second low voltage switches to configure the DC-DC converter into each of (i) a full charging mode, (ii) a charging mode with an HV1 off operation, (iii) a charging mode with an HV2 off operation, (iv) a charging mode with an LV1 off operation, (v) a charging mode with an LV2 off operation, (vi) an HV1-HV2 balance operation, and (vii) an LV1-LV2 balance operation” in combination with all the other elements recited in claim 5.
Claim 6, being dependent on claim 5, would be allowable for the same reasons as claim 5.
With respect to claim 9, the following is an examiner's statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to further teach or suggest “wherein the DC-DC converter further includes: a low voltage bus coupler switch connected to the primary side of the first low voltage buck-boost converter and the primary side of the second buck-boost converter” in combination with all the other elements recited in claim 9.
Claims 10-11, being dependent on claim 9, would be allowable for the same reasons as claim 9.
With respect to claim 17, the following is an examiner's statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to further teach or suggest “wherein the operations further include: controlling an operation of a bridge driver of the DC-DC converter to operate in each of a half-bridge driver configuration and in a full-bridge driver configuration, and controlling the operation of the first high voltage buck-boost converter, the second high voltage buck-boost converter, the first low voltage buck-boost converter, and the second low voltage buck-boost converter based on the operation of the bridge driver” in combination with all the other elements recited in claim 17.
With respect to claim 19, the following is an examiner's statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to further teach or suggest “wherein the operations further include: controlling an operation of one or more switches of the DC-DC converter to configure the DC-DC converter into each of (i) a full charging mode, (ii) a charging mode with an HV1 off operation, (iii) a charging mode with an HV2 off operation, (iv) a charging mode with an LV1 off operation, (v) a charging mode with an LV2 off operation, (vi) an HV1-HV2 balance operation, and (vii) an LV1-LV2 balance operation” in combination with all the other elements recited in claim 19.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID V HENZE whose telephone number is (571)272-3317. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 9am to 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, Julian Huffman can be reached at 571-272-2147. 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.
/DAVID V HENZE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights