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
This office action is a response to a paper filed on 04/23/2026 in which claims 1, 3-12 and 14-20 are pending and ready for examination.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-12 and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abramov (US 2014/0043004 A1) in view of Pazhayaveetil et al (hereinafter Pazhayaveetil) (US 2018/0337597 A1) further in view of Mao et al (hereinafter Mao) (US 2013/0318366 A1).
As to claims 1, 12 and 20, Abramov discloses power system (Fig 3, 300) configured to be coupled to at least one energy-storage device (Fig 3, Vin, parag [0004]), the power system comprising:
a first switch (Fig 3, 302);
a second switch (Fig 3, 304); and
at least one controller (Fig 3, 306) configured to:
detect whether the power system is in the CCM or in the DCM based on an output power of the energy-storage device, and a relation between the output power of the energy-storage device and the boundary power value, and control the synchronizing switch to be open in one of a buck mode or a boost mode in response to detecting that the power system is in the DCM (see Fig 3, parags [0069-0075]).
Abramov does not disclose: determine, based on an output voltage of the energy-storage device, a boundary power value representing a threshold above which the power system is in a constant conduction mode (CCM) and below which the power system is in a discontinuous conduction mode (DCM).
However, Pazhayaveetil discloses a boundary power value representing a threshold above which the power system is in a constant conduction mode (CCM) and below which the power system is in a discontinuous conduction mode (DCM) (see parags [0051], [0055]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Abramov to include the teachings as taught by Pazhayaveetil in order to effectively control the power supplied to the load.
The combination of Abramov and Pazhayaveetil does not disclose the first switching device configured to be operated as a high-frequency switch in a buck mode and as a synchronizing switch in a boost mode; the second switching device configured to be operated as the high-frequency switch in a boost mode and as the synchronizing switch in a buck mode. However Mao discloses the first switching device configured to be operated as a high-frequency switch in a buck mode and as a synchronizing switch in a boost mode; the second switching device configured to be operated as the high-frequency switch in a boost mode and as the synchronizing switch in a buck mode (see
parags [0033], [0036], [0041], [0043]). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Abramov and Pazhayaveetil to include buck-boost regulator as taught by Mao in order to provide current control with low power loss and efficient power transfer.
As to claims 3 and 14, the combination of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao discloses the system of claim 6, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to detect that the power system is in the DCM in response to determining that the output power of the energy-storage device is less than the boundary power value (Pazhayaveetil, see parags [0051], [0055]).
As to claims 4 and 15, the combination of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao discloses the system of claim 6, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to detect that the power is in the CCM in response to determining that the output power of the energy-storage device is greater than the boundary power value (Pazhayaveetil, see parags [0051], [0055]).
As to claims 5 and 16, the combination of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to control the synchronizing swicth to be operated in complementary fashion with the high-frequency switch in response to detecting that the power system is in the CCM (Abramov, see Fig 8, parags [0097-0104]).
As to claims 6 and 17, the combination of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to detect that the power system is in the (CCM) based on the relation between the boundary power value and the output power (Pazhayaveetil, see parags [0051], [0055]).
As to claims 7 and 18, the combination of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the buck mode is a mode of buck power conversion from a DC bus to the energy- storage device (Mao, Fig 2, buck switches), and the boost mode is a mode of boost power conversion from the energy-storage device to the DC bus (Mao, Fig 2, boost switches).
As to claims 8 and 19, the combination of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to: control the first switching device to be operating in complementary fashion with the second switching device in the boost mode based on detecting that the power system is in the CCM; and control the second switching device to be operating in complementary fashion with the first switching device in the buck mode based on detecting that the power system is in the CCM (Abramov, see Figs 8 & 14, parags [0097-0104]).
As to claim 9, the combination of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to:
control the first switching device to be open in the boost mode based on detecting that the power system is in the DCM; and control the second switching device to be open in the buck mode based on detecting that the power system is in the DCM (Abramov, see parags [0077], [0083-0086]).
As to claim 10, the combination of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising an inductor (Abramov, Fig 3, L) coupled to the first switching device and the second switching device.
As to claim 11, the combination of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao discloses the system of claim 10, wherein the inductor is configured to discharge stored energy through a body diode of the synchronizing switch while the high-frequency switch is open (Abramov, see Fig 3, parag [0084]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-12, filed on 04/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 12 and 20 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Regarding the argument “control the synchronizing switch to be open in one of a buck mode or a boost mode in response to detecting that the power system is in the DCM”, since this limitation used “or” in the claim, the examiner only needs to consider the synchronizing switch either open in a buck mode or a boost mode. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Abramov, Pazhayaveetil and Mao et al.
Conclusion
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 DUC M PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-
5026. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am - 6:00 pm, Monday to Friday.
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, Kim, Taelor can be reached at 571-270-7166. 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.
/DUC M PHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2836 September 8, 2026
/TAELOR KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights