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 . 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.
This office action is in response to the application filed on 11/21/2023.
Priority
The certified copies of the priority filed on 11/21/2023 do not have the same foreign application number as shown on the Bib Data Sheet. Appropriate correction is required.
Drawing
The drawings filed on 11/21/2023 are acceptable.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/21/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner.
Applicant has amended claims 2-6 to correct minor informalities and added new claims 8-17. No new matter is added.
Claims 1-17 are pending and have been examined.
Claim Objection
Claims 14-17 are objected to because of the following informalities: It appears that on line 3 of the claims “the power supply switch” should be “the second power supply switch”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-3, 5, 7-9 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakao et al. (US 11,130,457 B2) hereinafter ‘Nakao.
In re to claim 1, Nakao disclose a power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) for controlling power supplied via a power supply switch (i.e. power supply circuits 12, 22, 32, and 42 include switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a controlled to be turned on and off by integrated ECU 50, respectively, see fig. 1, and col. 7, lines 31-37), comprising: a switcher configured to turn the power supply switch on or off (i.e. monitor circuits 13, 23, 33, and 43 are configured to inform controllers 11, 21, 31, and 41 about whether the first power supply signal transmitted from controller 51 to power supply circuits 12, 22, 32, and 42 is the on signal or the off signal, l, respectively see col. 9, lines 1-5); a first communication unit configured to transmit an ON signal instructing to turn on the power supply switch and an OFF signal instructing to turn off the power supply switch to the switcher via a first communication line (i.e. controller 51 is configured to control switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a through direct lines S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, see fig. 1 and col. 13, lines 20-28); a determination unit configured to determine whether communication via the first communication line is interrupted; and a second communication unit configured to transmit the ON signal and the OFF signal to the switcher via a second communication line, if it is determined by the determination unit that the interruption has occurred (i.e. when it is determined in S51 that controller 51 does not receive the response signal (NO), controller 51 determines in S52 whether or not a prescribed time elapses since the first power supply signal was switched from the off signal to the on signal. While it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time does not elapse (NO), the processes in S51 and S52 are repeatedly performed at every prescribed control cycle. When it is determined that controller 51 does not receive or signal interruption, the response signal (NO in S51) and it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time elapses (YES), controller 51 determines that power supply circuit 12 has an abnormality, see fig. 7, the prescribed time used in S52 is a parameter that defines a time period during which controller 51 can receive the response signal when power supply circuit 12 is normal, see col. 21, lines 45-59).
In re to claim 2, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 1, further(controller 41) of communication ECU 40 to be turned on and off. Controller 51 is configured to control switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a through direct lines S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, see col.
In re to claim 3, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 1, furtherS52 that the prescribed time elapses (YES), controller 51 determines that power supply circuit 12 has an abnormality. The prescribed time used in S52 is a parameter that defines a period during which controller 51 can receive the response signal when power supply circuit 12 is normal, see col. 21, lines 45-59).
In re to claim 5, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 1, further including an instruction unit configured to instruct the first communication unit to transmit the ON signal or the OFF signal (i.e. controller 51 is configured to control switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a through direct lines S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, see fig. 1 and col. 13, lines 20-28);, wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the instruction unit stops operating (i.e. when it is determined in S51 that controller 51 does not receive the response signal (NO), controller 51 determines in S52 whether or not a prescribed time elapses since the first power supply signal was switched from the off signal to the on signal, while it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time does not elapse (NO), the processes in S51 and S52 are repeatedly performed at every prescribed control cycle. When it is determined that controller 51 does not receive signal interruption, the response signal (NO in S51) and it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time elapses (YES), controller 51 determines that power supply circuit 12 has an abnormality. The prescribed time used in S52 is a parameter that defines a period during which controller 51 can receive the response signal when power supply circuit 12 is normal, see col. 21, lines 45-59).
In re to claim 8, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 2, furthereach power supply switch is controlled to be turned on and off by controller 51 of integrated ECU 50. More specifically, switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a are controlled by a first power supply signal transmitted from controller 51 to power supply circuits, see, col. 7, lines 54-67 and power supply circuits 12, 22, 32, and 42 are configured to bring switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a into the connected state and start up controllers 11, 21, 31, and 41, respectively, when a prescribed connection condition is satisfied, the prescribed connection condition including a condition that the above-described first power supply signal is switched from the off signal to the on signal.” Col. 8, lines, 1-4); wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the value of the switch current acquired by the acquisition unit is less than a predetermined current value despite the instruction unit instructing the first communication unit to transmit the ON signal (i.e. when it is determined in S51 that controller 51 does not receive the response signal (NO), controller 51 determines in S52 whether or not a prescribed time elapses since the first power supply signal was switched from the off signal to the on signal. While it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time does not elapse (NO), the processes in S51 and S52 are repeatedly performed at every prescribed control cycle. When it is determined that controller 51 does not receive signal interruption, the response signal (NO in S51) and it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time elapses (YES), controller 51 determines that power supply circuit 12 has an abnormality. The prescribed time used in S52 is a parameter that defines a period during which controller 51 can receive the response signal when power supply circuit 12 is normal, see col. 21, lines 45-59).
In re to claim 9, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 2, furtherconfigured to acquire a value of a switch current flowing through the power supply switch (i.e. each power supply switch is controlled to be turned on and off by controller 51 of integrated ECU 50. More specifically, switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a are controlled by a first power supply signal transmitted from controller 51 to power supply circuits, see, col. 7, lines 54-67 and power supply circuits 12, 22, 32, and 42 are configured to bring switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a into the connected state and start up controllers 11, 21, 31, and 41, respectively, when a prescribed connection condition is satisfied, the prescribed connection condition including a condition that the above-described first power supply signal is switched from the off signal to the on signal.” Col. 8, lines, 1-4); wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the value of the switch current acquired by the acquisition unit is greater or equal to a second predetermined current value despite the instruction unit instructing the first communication unit to transmit the OFF signal (i.e. when it is determined in S51 that controller 51 does not receive the response signal (NO), controller 51 determines in S52 whether or not a prescribed time elapses since the first power supply signal was switched from the off signal to the on signal. While it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time does not elapse (NO), the processes in S51 and S52 are repeatedly performed at every prescribed control cycle. When it is determined that controller 51 does not receive signal interruption, the response signal (NO in S51) and it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time elapses (YES), controller 51 determines that power supply circuit 12 has an abnormality. The prescribed time used in S52 is a parameter that defines a period during which controller 51 can receive the response signal when power supply circuit 12 is normal, see col. 21, lines 45-59).
In re to claim 11, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 2, further including an instruction unit configured to instruct the first communication unit to transmit the ON signal or the OFF signal (i.e. controller 51 is configured to control switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a through direct lines S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, see fig. 1 and col. 13, lines 20-28);, wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the instruction unit stops operating (i.e. when it is determined in S51 that controller 51 does not receive the response signal (NO), controller 51 determines in S52 whether or not a prescribed time elapses since the first power supply signal was switched from the off signal to the on signal, while it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time does not elapse (NO), the processes in S51 and S52 are repeatedly performed at every prescribed control cycle. When it is determined that controller 51 does not receive signal interruption, the response signal (NO in S51) and it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time elapses (YES), controller 51 determines that power supply circuit 12 has an abnormality. The prescribed time used in S52 is a parameter that defines a period during which controller 51 can receive the response signal when power supply circuit 12 is normal, see col. 21, lines 45-59).
In re to claim 12, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 3, further including an instruction unit configured to instruct the first communication unit to transmit the ON signal or the OFF signal (i.e. controller 51 is configured to control switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a through direct lines S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, see fig. 1 and col. 13, lines 20-28);, wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the instruction unit stops operating (i.e. when it is determined in S51 that controller 51 does not receive the response signal (NO), controller 51 determines in S52 whether or not a prescribed time elapses since the first power supply signal was switched from the off signal to the on signal, while it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time does not elapse (NO), the processes in S51 and S52 are repeatedly performed at every prescribed control cycle. When it is determined that controller 51 does not receive signal interruption, the response signal (NO in S51) and it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time elapses (YES), controller 51 determines that power supply circuit 12 has an abnormality. The prescribed time used in S52 is a parameter that defines a period during which controller 51 can receive the response signal when power supply circuit 12 is normal, see col. 21, lines 45-59).
In re to claim 13, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 2, further including an instruction unit configured to instruct the first communication unit to transmit the ON signal or the OFF signal (i.e. controller 51 is configured to control switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a through direct lines S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, see fig. 1 and col. 13, lines 20-28);, wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the instruction unit stops operating (i.e. when it is determined in S51 that controller 51 does not receive the response signal (NO), controller 51 determines in S52 whether or not a prescribed time elapses since the first power supply signal was switched from the off signal to the on signal, while it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time does not elapse (NO), the processes in S51 and S52 are repeatedly performed at every prescribed control cycle. When it is determined that controller 51 does not receive signal interruption, the response signal (NO in S51) and it is determined in S52 that the prescribed time elapses (YES), controller 51 determines that power supply circuit 12 has an abnormality. The prescribed time used in S52 is a parameter that defines a period during which controller 51 can receive the response signal when power supply circuit 12 is normal, see col. 21, lines 45-59).
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.
Claims 4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao et al. (US 11,130,457 B2) in view of Ura (US 2011/0010051 A1).
In re to claim 4, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 1, further including; an instruction unit (i.e. the controller 50, fig. 1) configured to instruct the first communication unit (i.e. the communication ECU 40) to transmit the ON signal or the OFF signal (i.e. The controller (controller 51) of integrated ECU 50 is configured to individually control the power supply switches (switches 12a, 22a and 32a) of the controllers (controllers 11, 21 and 31) of the charging ECUs and the power supply switch (switch 42a) of the controller (controller 41 of communication ECU 40 to be turned on and off. Controller 51 is configured to control switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a through direct lines S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, see col. 13, lines 20-28). Except, Nakao fail to explicitly disclose that an acquisition unit configured to acquire a value of a switch current flowing through the power supply switch, the microcomputers acquire the current values related to the motor’s power supply), wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the value of the switch current acquired by the acquisition unit is greater than or equal to a second predetermined current value despite the instruction unit instructing the first communication unit to transmit the OFF signal. Whereas, Ura teaches that an acquisition unit configured to acquire a value of a switch current flowing through the power supply switch (i.e. the microcomputers 17a, 17b, fig. 2 individually detect the actual current values I1, 12 of the motor 12, based on the output signals of the corresponding current sensors 23a, 23b. see par. [0034-0035]), wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the value of the switch current acquired by the acquisition unit is greater than or equal to a second predetermined current value despite the instruction unit instructing the first communication unit to transmit the OFF signal (i.e. the controller has an abnormality determining unit that determines that an abnormality occurs when a current deviation of an actual current value from the current command value exceeds a predetermined threshold value in at least one of the control signal generators See par. [0010]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was filed to have modified the power supply control device of Nakao by incorporating the teachings of Ura to determine an interruption based on the current being greater than or equal to a threshold despite the OFF signal instruction because the current value gives an immediate flag to the controllers to identify interruptions in the power supply.
In re to claim 10, Nakao disclose the power supply control device (i.e. 50, fig. 1, see col. 7, lines 14-17) according to claim 3, further including; an instruction unit (i.e. the controller 50, fig. 1) configured to instruct the first communication unit (i.e. the communication ECU 40) to transmit the ON signal or the OFF signal (i.e. The controller (controller 51) of integrated ECU 50 is configured to individually control the power supply switches (switches 12a, 22a and 32a) of the controllers (controllers 11, 21 and 31) of the charging ECUs and the power supply switch (switch 42a) of the controller (controller 41 of communication ECU 40 to be turned on and off. Controller 51 is configured to control switches 12a, 22a, 32a, and 42a through direct lines S1, S2, S3, and S4, respectively, see col. 13, lines 20-28). Except, Nakao fail to explicitly disclose that an acquisition unit configured to acquire a value of a switch current flowing through the power supply switch, the microcomputers acquire the current values related to the motor’s power supply), wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the value of the switch current acquired by the acquisition unit is greater than or equal to a second predetermined current value despite the instruction unit instructing the first communication unit to transmit the OFF signal. Whereas, Ura teaches that an acquisition unit configured to acquire a value of a switch current flowing through the power supply switch (i.e. the microcomputers 17a, 17b, fig. 2 individually detect the actual current values I1, 12 of the motor 12, based on the output signals of the corresponding current sensors 23a, 23b. see par. [0034-0035]), wherein the determination unit determines that the interruption has occurred, if the value of the switch current acquired by the acquisition unit is greater than or equal to a second predetermined current value despite the instruction unit instructing the first communication unit to transmit the OFF signal (i.e. the controller has an abnormality determining unit that determines that an abnormality occurs when a current deviation of an actual current value from the current command value exceeds a predetermined threshold value in at least one of the control signal generators See par. [0010]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was filed to have modified the power supply control device of Nakao by incorporating the teachings of Ura to determine an interruption based on the current being greater than or equal to a threshold despite the OFF signal instruction because the current value gives an immediate flag to the controllers to identify interruptions in the power supply.
In re to claim 7, method claim 7 is rejected based on the following case law, note that under MPEP 2112.02, the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device inherently performs the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed Cir. 1986). Therefore, the previous rejections based on the apparatus will not be repeated.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 14-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but
would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In re to claim 6, None of the cited prior art alone or in combination disclose or teach the claimed inventions in which “a second determination unit configured to determine whether communication is interrupted, wherein the second communication unit transmits a second ON signal instructing to turn on the second power supply switch and a second OFF signal instructing to turn off the second power supply switch to the second switcher via the second communication line, the second determination unit determines whether communication via the second communication line is interrupted, and the first communication unit transmits the second ON signal and the second OFF signal to the second switcher, if it is determined by the second determination unit that communication via the second communication line is interrupted”.
In re to claims 14-17, None of the cited prior art alone or in combination disclose or teach the claimed inventions in which “wherein the second communication unit transmits a second ON signal instructing to turn on the second power supply switch and a second OFF signal instructing to turn off the second power supply switch to the second switcher via the second communication line, the second determination unit determines whether communication via the second communication line is interrupted, and the first communication unit transmits the second ON signal and the second OFF signal to the second switcher, if it is determined by the second determination unit that communication via the second communication line is interrupted”
The art of record does not disclose the above limitations, nor would it be obvious to modify the art of record to include either of the above limitations.
Remarks
The Office has cited columns, line numbers, paragraph numbers, references, or
figures in the references applied to the claims below 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 reference in entirety, as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2141.02 and § 2123.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEMANE MEHARI whose telephone number is (571)270-7603. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM TO 6 PM.
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, Thienvu V. Tran can be reached at 5712701276. 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.
/YEMANE MEHARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838