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 .
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.
Claim 2, recites the limitation IF, and is a conditional statement without corresponding ELSE statements. If these limitations are not performed, then there is no defined process to be performed. The examiner understands that in this claim, the open conditional language causes this limitation to be omitted.
Processes can be considered as a series of steps to achieve a claimed task. When executing a process, each step is performed. However, upon reaching an "IF-THEN-ELSE" logical block, each TRUE/FALSE option is equally likely. A process step that includes only an "IF-THEN" logical question means that THEN result only occurs when the answer is TRUE. An answer equally likely is FALSE and therefore the THEN result will not occur.
The Examiner takes further guidance from the MPEP § 2106(11)C on how to handle these logical blocks. Specifically, "Language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed or does not limit a claim to a particular structure does not limit the scope of a claim or claim limitation." It is the Examiner's position that when a claimed invention includes a logical block that suggests another choice (FALSE), then the resulting action is not limiting as it may never be performed. For examination purposes, the examiner will interpret this claim as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1- 6, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maruyama (US 2020/0091830).
Regarding claim 1, Maruyama teaches a method for performing a pre-charging process of an onboard electrical system of a vehicle and for a charging process of a vehicle battery (see 30) of the vehicle immediately following the pre-charging process, wherein the vehicle battery (see 30) is galvanically connected to a first onboard electrical sub-system of the onboard electrical system by a first switch element and a changeover switch (see 35 and 80), the changeover switch being physically separated from the first switch element (see 35 and 80) and galvanically separated (see separation provided by 80 and 51c) from a charging path of the onboard electrical system by (see path from 2) a second switch element that is physically separated from the first switch element (see 80) and from the changeover switch, and wherein the first onboard electrical sub-system is galvanically separated from the charging path by the changeover switch (see 80),
wherein at least one line capacitance of the charging path of the onboard electrical system is pre-charged to a first voltage value by a power source electrically connected to the charging path (see capacitor inside filter 40), wherein at least one capacitor of the first onboard electrical sub-system is pre-charged to a second voltage value by the vehicle battery (see C2),wherein depending on a respective state of charge of the at least one line capacitance of the charging path and of the at least one capacitor of the first onboard electrical sub-system, the vehicle battery of the vehicle is charged by the power source (see C2 ), wherein for pre-charging the at least one capacitor of the first onboard electrical sub-system, a switch element (see DC/DC converter) of a semiconductor fuse, which is interconnected to at least one potential line between the first onboard electrical sub-system and the changeover switch, is opened (see operation of 80, Fig. 1), and wherein for supplying the first onboard electrical sub-system with a charging voltage, the switch element of the semiconductor fuse is closed (see change of 80 from state).
Regarding claim 9, Maruyama teaches an onboard electrical system for a vehicle with a first onboard electrical sub-system for electric components of the vehicle different from an electric drive unit (see 4; Maruyama), a second onboard electrical sub-system for the electric drive unit of the vehicle (see 60; Maruyama), a third onboard electrical sub-system for a vehicle battery of the vehicle (see 52, Fig. 2; Maruyama ), and a charging terminal for connecting the onboard electrical system to a power source external to vehicle (see 10 and 20, Fig. 2; Maruyama), wherein the onboard electrical system is formed for performing a method according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 2, Maruyama teaches wherein if the at least one line capacitance of the charging path is charged to the first voltage value and the at least one capacitor of the first onboard electrical sub-system is charged to the second voltage value, the vehicle battery is galvanically connected to the charging path by the second switch element and galvanically separated from the first onboard electrical sub-system by the first switch element and the changeover switch, whereby the vehicle battery is charged by the power source (see charring from 2 to charge 30, Fig. 1; Maruyama).
Regarding claim 3, Maruyama teaches wherein the first onboard electrical sub-system is additionally galvanically connected to the charging path by the changeover switch, whereby the first onboard electrical sub-system is supplied by the power source, in particular at least one electric drive of the onboard electrical system is discharged immediately after the pre-charging process (discharging of 51A; Maruyama).
Regarding claim 4, Maruyama teaches wherein a current flow from the changeover switch to the first onboard electrical sub-system is inhibited by the semiconductor fuse upon a short circuit within the onboard electrical system (see 80, Maruyama).
Regarding claim 5, Maruyama teaches wherein the at least one capacitor (see C1) of the first onboard electrical sub-system is pre-charged to the second voltage value by converting a battery voltage of the vehicle battery by means of a DC voltage converter of the first onboard electrical sub-system (see power from 20 to C1 via 51a).
Regarding claim 6, Maruyama teaches wherein the at least one line capacitance of the charging path and the at least one capacitor of the first onboard electrical sub-system are charged at the same time (see C1 and C2).
Regarding claim 8, Maruyama teaches wherein the first voltage value and/or the second voltage value are adjusted depending on a battery voltage of the vehicle battery, in particular a voltage value of 800 V is provided by the battery voltage (see battery 30, para 0023; Maruyama).
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maruyama in view of Gustafsson (US 2019/0001821).
Regarding claim 7, Maruyama teaches the method according to claim 1.
Yet does not disclose wherein during the pre-charging process of the onboard electrical system, an insulation resistance of the onboard electrical system and/or of the power source is monitored by an insulation monitoring unit of power source or by an insulation monitoring unit of the onboard electrical system.
However, Gustafsson in the same filed teaches during the pre-charging process of the onboard electrical system, an insulation resistance of the onboard electrical system and/or of the power source is monitored by an insulation monitoring unit of power source or by an insulation monitoring unit of the onboard electrical system (see para 0010-0018 and 0040-0054).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Maruyama with the teachings of Gustafsson having the pre-charging process of the onboard electrical system, an insulation resistance of the onboard electrical system and/or of the power source is monitored by an insulation monitoring unit of power source or by an insulation monitoring unit of the onboard electrical system in order to prevent damages and excess heating to critical devices within the distribution systems.
/ELIM ORTIZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights