DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDSes filed 3/11/24, 4/16/25, 9/11/25 and 5/26/26 have all been considered and placed of record. The four initialed copies are attached herewith.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Re claim 7, the limitation “the load” has already been introduced in claim 1.
Re claims 8-14, they are indefinite for depending on rejected claim 7.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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, 4, 7-9, 23, 39, 45 and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tenconi et al. (US 2017/0368950).
Re claim 1, the reference discloses a circuit (fig 1) to deliver energy to a load in repeated cycles and recover a portion of the energy, the circuit (fig 1) having, inter alia, an energy-storage component (C1, C1a) to receive energy from a voltage source or current source (G1, G2); a first switch (S1, S2) to reversibly couple the energy-storage component to a load (LR) along a first circuit path, the first switch configured to attain a first state such that, when the first switch is in the first state during a first portion of a first cycle of the repeated cycles, forward current flows from the energy-storage component to the load (para 62-68); and a second switch (D1, D2) to reversibly couple the energy-storage component to the load along a second circuit path, wherein the second circuit path is different, at least in part, from the first circuit path, the second switch configured to attain a first state such that, when the second switch is in the first state of the second switch during a second portion of the first cycle, energy from the load is returned to the energy-storage component such that at least a portion of the energy returned is available for a first portion of a second cycle of the repeated cycles that follows the first cycle (para 11 and 63-66).
Re claim 4, the reference discloses the energy storage component is a capacitor (C1, C1a).
Re claim 7, the reference discloses the load (LR).
Re claim 8, the reference discloses the first energy storage component maybe a capacitor (C1a) and the second energy storage component maybe the load (LR).
Re claim 9, the reference discloses the second energy storage component maybe an inductor (L).
Re claims 23 and 45, the components of claim 1 performed the steps of claims 23 and 45.
Re claim 39, the reference discloses the load maybe an inductor (L) producing a magnetic field.
Re claim 49, the reference discloses a system having, inter alia, a first energy-storage component (C1); a second energy-storage component (C1a); a load (LR); a first switch (S1, S2) to reversibly couple the first energy-storage component and the second energy-storage component to the load along a first circuit path during a first portion of an operational cycle of the system such that current flows from the first energy-storage component to the second energy-storage component and to the load (para 62-68); and a second circuit path different, at least in part, from the first circuit path and having a second switch (D1, D2) to reversibly couple the load to the first energy-storage component during a second portion of the operational cycle, the second circuit path configured to return energy from the load to the first energy-storage component so that the returned energy is available for a start of a next operational cycle of the system and a voltage polarity across the first energy-storage component at [[the]] an end of the second portion of the operational cycle is a same voltage polarity as the voltage polarity across the first energy-storage component at a beginning of the first portion of the operational cycle (para 11 and 63-66).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
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 2, 3, 5, 6, 10-12, 15, 19, 31, 40 and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tenconi et al. (US 2017/0368950).
Re claims 2 and 3, the reference does not specifically disclose the specific claimed numbers. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the claimed values since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Re claims 5, 6, 11 and 40, the reference does not specifically disclose the specific claimed range. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the claimed range values since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Re claim 10, the reference discloses the second energy storage component maybe an inductor (L). Inductors are electromagnetic coils. However, the reference does not disclose whether the coils are single-turn or segmented coils. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the coils to be single-turn or segmented since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known materiale on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Re claim 12, the reference does not disclose the second energy storage component is a second capacitor. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected a second capacitor as the second energy storage component since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known materiale on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Re claims 15, 19 and 46, the reference is silent on the type of switches being SCRs. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected SCRs as switches since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known materiale on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Re claim 31, the reference does not specifically disclose the second amount of energy is 90% more of the first amount of energy. It would have been well within the skill of one versed in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have selected the claimed value of 90% since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13, 14, 16-18, 20-22, 24-30, 32-38, 41-44, 47 and 48 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to the Examiner at the below-listed number. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu from 7:00am-5:00pm.
The Examiner’s SPE is Drew Dunn and he can be reached at 571.272.2312. The fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is 571.273.8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866.217.9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800.786.9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571.272.1000.
/EDWARD TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 571.272.2087
Prosecution Insights