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
2. This action is responsive to the Application filed on 10/18/2023. A filing date 10/18/2023 is acknowledged. A National Stage entry of PCT/CN2022/075832 and International Filing Date 2/10/2022 is acknowledged. The sought benefit of CN application 202110524738.8 (which was filed on 5/13/2021) is acknowledged. Claims 1-9 are pending in this application. Claims 1, 3, 5 are independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
3. Claims 1, 3, 5, 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weibing Jing et al (US Publication 20150100812 A1, hereinafter Jing et al), and in view Po-Tai Cheng et al (US Publication 20130073109 A1, hereinafter Cheng et al).
As for independent claim 3, Jing discloses: A method for loop closing and breaking [of a power distribution grid] based on decoupled voltage regulation (Jing et al. teaches of power switches connected to an independent voltage regulator - Fig. 2), comprising: acquiring voltage signals on two sides of a loop closing switch which performs a loop closing or breaking operation (Jing et al. teaches that the voltage monitor knows the voltage outputted by the voltage regulator (input to the power switch) and the voltage being outputted from the switch, therefore both sides of the switch – Fig. 2, pars. 4. 5, 20); calculating a compensating voltage amplitude [and phase-angle] according to the voltage signals (Jing et al. teaches a voltage monitor that compares the voltages present and determines which of the serial bus voltages is the lowest, and adjusts the output voltage of the voltage regulator (comparing, determining and adjusting are all considered calculating processes) – pars. 20-22); and outputting a compensating voltage through voltage regulation to compensate for the compensating voltage amplitude [and phase-angle], and then, performing the loop closing or breaking operation (Jing et al. teaches adjusting the output voltage of the voltage regulator to a level that causes the voltage at the output terminal of the switch to exceed, or at least meet, the minimum operating voltage threshold for the serial bus – par. 22; the power switches are configured to switch power from the voltage regulator to one of the serial buses. - par. 19, claim 1).
Although Jing et al. teaches of providing power to peripheral devices, they do not specifically teach that the power switches are part of a power distribution grid, where the compensation (adjustment) also includes adjusting a phase angle.
Cheng et al. (2013/0073109) teaches of a droop control system for grid-connected synchronization that is connected to a plurality of distributed power generation modules and a utility grid system (Abstract). Cheng et al. teaches that the control system also includes regulation control modules corresponding to the distributed power generation modules, which regulate/compensate the voltage amplitude, phase angle and frequency to provide synchronization with the utility system grid in order to eliminate the impact of impedance alterations in the power system which causes voltage fluctuations (Abstract, pars. 7, 17-18, 24).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art to use the system taught by Jing et al. in a power distribution grid system, as taught by Cheng et al., where not only the voltage is adjusted/compensated (as taught by Jing et al.), but also a phase angle is adjusted/compensated (as taught by Cheng et al). This would have been obvious because both Jing et al. (Figs. 1 and 2) and Cheng et al. (Fig. 1) teach of power delivery systems where voltage is provided through modules that include power switches to provide power to devices/loads on a bus. Both Jing et al. (par. 13) and Cheng et al. (Abstract) also teach that regulating the voltage provided is needed due to load/impedance alterations. A person skilled in the art would have been motivated to use the system taught by Jing et al. in a power distribution grid system similar to Cheng et al., since it would help “minimize voltage fluctuations and achieve stabilization” (as taught in par. 3 of Cheng et al.).
As for independent claim 1, Jing discloses: A device for loop closing and breaking of [a power distribution grid] based on decoupled voltage regulation (Jing et al. teaches of power switches connected to an independent voltage regulator - Fig. 2), comprising: a voltage-regulation phase shifter, a control system, a voltage acquisition device and a loop closing switch (Jing et al. teaches that the voltage monitor knows the voltage outputted by the voltage regulator (input to the power switch) and the voltage being outputted from the switch, therefore both sides of the switch – Fig. 2, pars. 4. 5, 20), wherein: the voltage acquisition device acquires voltage signals on two sides of the loop closing switch performing a loop closing or breaking operation and transmits the voltage signals to the control system (Jing et al. teaches that the voltage monitor knows the voltage outputted by the voltage regulator (input to the power switch) and the voltage being outputted from the switch, therefore both sides of the switch – Fig. 2, pars. 4. 5, 20); the control system calculates a compensating voltage amplitude and [phase-angle] according to the voltage signals, and sends an instruction to the voltage-regulation phase shifter according to the compensating voltage amplitude and [phase-angle] (Jing et al. teaches a voltage monitor that compares the voltages present and determines which of the serial bus voltages is the lowest, and adjusts the output voltage of the voltage regulator (comparing, determining and adjusting are all considered calculating processes) – pars. 20-22); the voltage-regulation phase shifter outputs the compensating voltage amplitude and [phase-angle] according to the instruction from the control system, to compensate for a voltage difference between the two sides of the loop closing switch (Jing et al. teaches adjusting the output voltage of the voltage regulator to a level that causes the voltage at the output terminal of the switch to exceed, or at least meet, the minimum operating voltage threshold for the serial bus – par. 22; the power switches are configured to switch power from the voltage regulator to one of the serial buses. - par. 19, claim 1).
Although Jing et al. teaches of providing power to peripheral devices, they do not specifically teach that the power switches are part of a power distribution grid, where the compensation (adjustment) also includes adjusting a phase angle.
Cheng et al. (2013/0073109) teaches of a droop control system for grid-connected synchronization that is connected to a plurality of distributed power generation modules and a utility grid system (Abstract). Cheng et al. teaches that the control system also includes regulation control modules corresponding to the distributed power generation modules, which regulate/compensate the voltage amplitude, phase angle and frequency to provide synchronization with the utility system grid in order to eliminate the impact of impedance alterations in the power system which causes voltage fluctuations (Abstract, pars. 7, 17-18, 24).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art to use the system taught by Jing et al. in a power distribution grid system, as taught by Cheng et al., where not only the voltage is adjusted/compensated (as taught by Jing et al.), but also a phase angle is adjusted/compensated (as taught by Cheng et al). This would have been obvious because both Jing et al. (Figs. 1 and 2) and Cheng et al. (Fig. 1) teach of power delivery systems where voltage is provided through modules that include power switches to provide power to devices/loads on a bus. Both Jing et al. (par. 13) and Cheng et al. (Abstract) also teach that regulating the voltage provided is needed due to load/impedance alterations. A person skilled in the art would have been motivated to use the system taught by Jing et al. in a power distribution grid system similar to Cheng et al., since it would help “minimize voltage fluctuations and achieve stabilization” (as taught in par. 3 of Cheng et al.).
As for independent claim 5, it recites features that are substantially same as those features claimed by claims 1 and 3, thus the rationales for rejecting claims 1 and 3 are incorporated herein. Please see in Jing et al. Fig. 2 for more details of the power supply circuit comprising power supply, switches and load.
As for claim 7, Jing-Cheng discloses: wherein when the power distribution grid operates normally, the loop closing switch K1 and the loop closing switch K2 are closed, the power supply S1 supplies power to the load R1, and the power supply S2 supplies power to the load R2; when a loop closing operation of the power distribution grid is needed, the following steps are performed: closing the loop closing switch K3, and connecting the voltage-regulation phase shifter to the power distribution grid; acquiring, by the control system, voltages on two sides of the loop closing switch k4, and calculating a compensating voltage according to a difference between the voltages on the two sides; calculating, by the control system, an operating position of the voltage-regulation phase shifter according to the compensating voltage, and sending the operating position to the voltage-regulation phase shifter to implement a voltage-regulation phase shift; and
recalculating, by the control system, the voltages on the two sides the loop closing switch K4 until the compensating voltage is less than a set threshold, closing the loop-closing switch K4 to complete loop closing, and opening the loop closing switch K2 to complete loop breaking, and supplying power to the load R2 by the power supply S1 (Jing et al. teaches adjusting the output voltage of the voltage regulator to a level that causes the voltage at the output terminal of the switch to exceed, or at least meet, the minimum operating voltage threshold for the serial bus – par. 22; the power switches are configured to switch power from the voltage regulator to one of the serial buses. - par. 19, claim 1).
As for claim 8, Jing-Cheng discloses: wherein when a line on the power supply S2 side of the power distribution grid is under maintenance, the loop closing switch K1, the loop closing switch K3 and the loop closing switch K4 are closed, the loop closing switch K2 is opened, and the power supply S1 supplies power to the load R1 and the load R2; when the load R2 is switched to be supplied with power by the power supply S2 independently after the line on the power supply S2 side is maintained, a loop breaking operation of the power distribution grid is performed through the following steps: acquiring, by the control system, voltages on two sides of the loop closing switch K2, and calculating a compensating voltage according to a difference between the voltages on the two sides; controlling, by the control system, the voltage-regulation phase shifter to perform voltage regulation according to the compensating voltage; and recalculating, by the control system, the voltages on the two sides the loop closing switch K2 until the compensating voltage is less than a set threshold, closing the loop-closing switch K2 to complete loop closing, and opening the loop closing switch K4 to complete loop breaking, and supplying power to the load R2 by the power supply S2 (Jing et al. Fig. 2, the voltage monitor compensates for voltage drop across the power switch, and ensures that the voltage regulator provides adequate voltage to drive all of the serial buses to a voltage that is within the operational voltage specification for the serial buses - par. 16, par. 19, par. 22).
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 2, 4, 6, 9 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims 1, 3 and 5, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular columns/paragraph and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. This will assist in expediting compact prosecution. MPEP 714.02 recites: “Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP § 2163.06. An amendment which does not comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121(b), (c), (d), and (h) may be held not fully responsive. See MPEP § 714.” Amendments not pointing to specific support in the disclosure may be deemed as not complying with provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.131(b), (c), (d), and (h) and therefore held not fully responsive. Generic statements such as “Applicants believe no new matter has been introduced” may be deemed insufficient.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Applicants are required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action.
Wells (US Publication 2010156190 A1) Hierarchical Control Of Micro-grids
Dall et al (US Publication 20170214244) REAL TIME VOLTAGE REGULATION THROUGH GATHER AND BROADCAST TECHNIQUES
Sun (US Publication 20160359326) TRANSIENT IMPEDANCE TRANSFORMER BASED ON AC VOLTAGE REGULATING ELECTRONIC SWITCH
It is noted that any citation to specific pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 U.S.P.Q. 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 U.S.P.Q. 275, 277 (C.C.P.A. 1968)).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hua Lu whose telephone number is 571-270-1410 and fax number is 571-270-2410. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00 am to 6:00 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman can be reached on 571-272-3644. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-273-8300.
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.
/Hua Lu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118