Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/526,184

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR LOAD HARMONIC SUPPRESSION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 01, 2023
Examiner
PHAM, DUC M
Art Unit
2849
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Schneider Electric It Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
555 granted / 626 resolved
+20.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
661
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
38.0%
-2.0% vs TC avg
§112
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 626 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 11/13/2025 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). 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 a 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 first switch to be open in one of a buck mode or a boost mode based on detecting 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. As to claims 3 and 14, the combination of Abramov and Pazhayaveetil discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to detect the DCM responsive 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 and Pazhayaveetil discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to detect the continuous conduction mode (CCM) responsive 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 and Pazhayaveetil discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to control the first switch to be closed in one of the buck mode or the boost mode based on detecting the CCM (Abramov, see Fig 8, parags [0097-0104]). As to claims 6 and 17, the combination of Abramov and Pazhayaveetil discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to detect the continuous conduction mode (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 and Pazhayaveetil discloses the system of claim 6, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to control the first switch to be closed in one of the buck mode or the boost mode based on detecting the CCM (Abramov, see Fig 8, parags [0097-0104]). As to claims 8 and 19, the combination of Abramov and Pazhayaveetil discloses the system of claim 7, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to: control the first switch to be closed in the boost mode based on detecting the CCM; and control the second switch to be closed in the buck mode based on detecting the CCM (Abramov, see Figs 8 & 14, parags [0097-0104]). As to claim 9, the combination of Abramov and Pazhayaveetil discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one controller is further configured to: control the first switch to be open in the boost mode based on detecting the DCM; and control the second switch to be open in the buck mode based on detecting the DCM (Abramov, see parags [0077], [0083-0086]). As to claim 10, the combination of Abramov and Pazhayaveetil discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising an inductor (Abramov, Fig 3, L) coupled to the first switch and the second switch. As to claim 11, the combination of Abramov and Pazhayaveetil discloses the system of claim 10, wherein the inductor is configured to discharge stored energy through a body diode of the first switch while the first switch is open (Abramov, see Fig 3, parag [0084]). Conclusion 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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 5712727492. 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 December 9, 2025 /REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 01, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 03, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 03, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 06, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 22, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 12, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 12, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 13, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 19, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592565
BACKUP APPARATUS AND POWER CONVERTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583328
PRECHARGE APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580409
OPERATION METHOD, OPERATION DEVICE, AND OPERATION SYSTEM OF BATTERY, AND NON-TRANSITORY STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12556030
Timing Determination for UPS Power Transfer
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12549027
POWER SUPPLY CIRCUIT AND METHOD, AND VEHICLE EMPLOYING CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.4%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 626 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month