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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 09/24/2025 has been entered. As directed by the amendment: claims 1 and 6 are amended. No claims are cancelled. Claim 12 is newly added. Thus, Claims 1 – 12 are currently pending. Applicant’s arguments regarding the Non-Final Rejection on 03/25/2025 have been fully considered (please see “Response to Arguments” section) and the following Final Rejection is made herein.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1 – 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kocher et al. (US 2005/0143846 A1), hereinafter “Kocher”, in view of Thomas et al. (US 2014/0003095 A1) and hereinafter “Thomas”.
Regarding claim 1, Kocher discloses a method of providing welding-type power (a method of controlling power provided by a multivariable power sources, (0003 – 0005) *Note here “welding-type power’ is considered a purpose or an intended use only recited in the preamble. As such, no patentable weight is given for the term, MPEP 2111.02.11.) comprising:
monitoring, by a sensor directly connected to a power bus, a power demand on a power bus (measuring the DC bus voltage and current to and from the DC bus 18, by circuit 70 implemented in controller 12, the circuit 70 measures the bi- directional converter current I Bi, and its corresponding setpoint value I Bi*, dc bus voltage VBUS, and battery voltage VBAT, (0040 and see annotated FIG. 3) , thus, circuit 70 is a sensor, monitoring power demand of the power bus and is directly connected to the power bus as shown in the annotated FIG.3 and is implemented in the controller 12) wherein the power bus is connected to a bi-directional 3-level converter having an adjustable output duty cycle, and the bi-directional 3-level converter is connected to an energy storage device (wherein DC power bus 18 is connected to a bi-directional converter 20 having an adjustable duty cycle output, and the bi-directional converter 20 is connected to an electrical energy storage device (EESD) 30, (0038 and see FIG.2));
adjusting, by a controller, the output duty cycle of a bi-directional 3-level converter to convert power from the energy storage device to the power bus in response to a first power demand characteristic on the power bus (adjusting, by the controller 12, the duty cycle of the bi- directional converter 20 to deliver/discharge power from the electrical energy storage device 30 to the DC bus 18 based on measurement input from the DC power bus 18 (Vbus) through circuit 70 implemented in controller 12, (038-0041 and FIGS 2 and 3)*Note that “a first power demand characteristics” is interpreted to mean measurement input from the DC bus (Vbus) through the circuit 70 ); and
adjusting, by a controller, the output duty cycle of the bi-directional 3-level converter to convert power from the power bus to the energy storage device in response to a second power demand characteristic on the power bus (adjusting, by the controller 12, the duty cycle of the bi- directional converter 20 to deliver/charge power from the DC bus 18 to the electrical energy storage device 30 based on measurement input from the energy storage 30 (Vbat) through circuit 70 implemented in controller 12, (038 – 0041 and FIGS. 2 and 3)*Note here “a second power demand characteristics” is interpreted to mean measurement input from the energy storage bus (Vbat) through the circuit 70).
PNG
media_image1.png
381
714
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kocher does not explicitly teach the bi-directional converter 20 is a 3-level converter.
However, Thomas that relates to bi-directional converters for high voltages (0001), also teaches a variety of multi-level converters, wherein in a two-stage converter (2-level converter), there are two voltage states, in a three-stage converter (3-level converter), there are three voltage states, etc. can be used depending on a specific application, (0009). Further, Thomas teaches that the introduction of the additional voltage level, in comparison to the 2-level converter, translates into another degree of freedom for the modulation of the converter and the additional degree of freedom can be used to minimize the total losses of the converter and maximize the transformation ratio for a given load range, (0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify the bi-directional converter of Kocher to be a 3-level converter as such converters are known to minimize losses and maximize transformation ratio, improving operating efficiency of the converter as taught in Thomas. POSITA apprised of Thomas teachings would be motivated to choose the bidirectional converter of Kocher to be a3- level converter with reasonable expectation of success in order to achieve the advantages of minimized loss and maximum operating efficiency.
Regarding claim 2, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
monitoring a charge level of the energy storage device (the energy storage device variables (Vbat and I bat) are monitored to ensure that battery-charging current limits are not exceeded, Kocher (0035); and
adjusting the output duty cycle of the bi-directional 3-level converter to convert power from the power bus to the energy storage device, to maintain a predetermined energy storage device charge level, in response to an energy storage device charge level characteristic (adjusting the duty cycle of the bi-directional converter 20 to deliver/charge power from the DC bus 18 to the electrical energy storage device 3, to maintain battery-charging limits are not exceeded, based on measurement input from the energy storage 30 (Vbat) through circuit 70 implemented in controller 12, Kocher (0035, 038 – 0041 and FIGS 2 and 3)).
Regarding claim 3, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising balancing the power bus in response to an imbalanced load by adjusting the output duty cycle of the bi-directional 3-level converter (the duty cycle D of the bidirectional converter is adjusted by the controller in order to keep a certain ratio (balance) between the energy storage device (battery) and the power bus according to defined equations, Kocher (0041 - 0046)).
Regarding claim 4, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the output duty cycle of the bi-directional 3-level converter is increased to convert power from the power bus to recharge the energy storage device and decreased to convert power from the energy storage device to provide power to the power bus (the output duty cycle of the bi-directional 3-level converter 20 is varied by the controller 12 according to the desired level of charging or discharging current of the energy storage device (battery) 30 and desired level of power delivered to or removed from the dc bus 18, Kocher (0038 — 0040)) and when Kocher in view of Thomas discloses varying the duty cycle of the bi-directional 3-level converter 20 according to a desired level of charging or discharging current of the energy storage device 30 and desired level of power delivered to or removed from the dc bus 18, one of ordinal skill in the art would appreciate that it includes increasing and decreasing the duty cycle of the bi-directional 3-level converter 20 depending on the power demand of converting power from the energy storage device to the DC bus and vice versa. “in considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one Skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom.", MPEP 2144.01.
Regarding claim 5, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the bi- directional 3-level converter comprises a plurality of switches each having an adjustable duty cycle, and wherein the output duty cycle of the bi-directional 3-level converter is adjusted by controlling the duty cycle of at least one of the plurality of switches (the bidirectional converter comprises a plurality of switches (transistors 62, 64) each having an adjustable duty cycle and the output duty cycle of the bi-directional converter is adjusted by controlling the duty cycle of at least one of the plurality of the transistors, Kocher (0037 and see FIG.2)).
Regarding claim 6, Kocher a bi-directional 3-level converter connecting an energy storage device to a power bus (a bi-directional converter 20 connecting an energy storage device 30 to a DC bus 18, see FIG.2), the bi-directional converter configured to:
convert power from an energy storage device to a power bus at a first bi-directional 3-level converter duty cycle in response to a first power demand characteristic on the power bus (convert/discharge power from the electrical energy storage device 30 to the DC bus 18 based on measurement input from the DC power bus 18 (Vbus) through circuit 70 implemented in controller 12, (038- 0041 and FIGS 2 and 3)*Note here “a first power demand characteristics” is interpreted to mean measurement input from the DC bus (Vbus) through the circuit 70); and
convert power from the power bus to the energy storage device at a second bi-directional 3-level converter duty cycle in response to a second power demand characteristic on the power bus (covert/charge power from the DC bus 18 to the electrical energy storage device 30 based on measurement input from the energy storage 30 (Vbat) through circuit 70 implemented in controller 12, (038- 0041 and FIGS 2 and 3)*Note here “a second power demand characteristics” is interpreted to mean measurement input from the energy storage bus (Vbat) through the circuit 70),
wherein the first and second power demand characteristics are monitored by a sensor directly connected to the power bus (the circuit 70 measures directly the bi- directional converter current I Bi, and its corresponding setpoint value I Bi*, dc bus voltage VBUS, and battery voltage VBAT (0040 and see annotated FIG. 3) , thus, circuit 70 is a sensor, monitoring power demand of the power bus and is directly connected to the power bus as shown in the annotated FIG.3 and is implemented in the controller 12).
Kocher does not explicitly teach the bi-directional converter 20 is a 3-level converter.
However, Thomas that relates to bi-directional converters for high voltages (0001), also teaches a variety of multi-level converters, wherein in a two-stage converter (2-level converter), there are two voltage states, in a three-stage converter (3-level converter), there are three voltage states, etc. can be used depending on a specific application, (0009). Further, Thomas teaches that the introduction of the additional voltage level, in comparison to the 2-level converter, translates into another degree of freedom for the modulation of the converter and the additional degree of freedom can be used to minimize the total losses of the converter and maximize the transformation ratio for a given load range, (0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify the bi-directional converter of Kocher to be a 3-level converter as such converters are known to minimize losses and maximize transformation ratio, improving operating efficiency of the converter as taught in Thomas. POSITA apprised of Thomas teachings would be motivated to choose the bidirectional converter of Kocher to be a3 - level converter with reasonable expectation of success in order to achieve the advantages of minimized loss and maximum operating efficiency.
Regarding claim 7, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches the bi-directional 3-level converter of claim 6, wherein the first bi-directional 3-level converter duty cycle is lower than the second duty cycle (the output duty cycle of the bi-directional converter 20 is varied by the controller 12 according to the desired power demand, Kocher (0038 – 0040) thus, the controller 12 capable of adjusting the first bi-directional converter duty cycle to be lower than the second duty cycle).
Regarding claim 8, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches the bi-directional 3-level converter of claim 6, wherein the first or second duty cycle is selected by a controller configured to respond to a power demand characteristic on the power bus (Controller 12 adjusts the duty cycle of bi- directional converter 20 during power transfer from the power bus 18 to the energy storage device 30 (charging) or from the energy device 30 to a power bus 18 (discharging) to establish the desired level of power on the power bus, Kocher (0038 – 0040)).
Regarding claim 9, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches the bi-directional converter of claim 6, further configured to convert power from the power bus to the energy storage device at a third duty cycle in response to a charge level characteristic at the energy storage device below a threshold level to recharge the energy storage device (the output duty cycle of the bi-directional converter 20 is varied by the controller 12 according to the desired level of charging or discharging current of the energy storage device (battery) 30 and desired level of power delivered to or removed from the dc bus 18, Kocher (0038 — 0040) Thus, the controller 12 is configured to convert power from the power bus to the energy storage device at a third duty cycle in response to a charge level characteristic at the energy storage device below a threshold level to recharge the energy storage device).
Regarding claim 10, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches the bi-directional converter of claim 6, wherein the power demand characteristic is a voltage level measured at the bus, and the charge level characteristic is a voltage level measured at the energy storage device (the power demand characteristics is the measurement input from the DC bus (Vbus) and measurement input from the energy storage bus (Vbat) through the circuit 70, Kocher (0040 and see FIGS 2 and 3)).
Regarding claim 11, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches the bi-directional converter of claim 6, further configured to maintain a balance across the power bus while the power bus is supplying power to at least one auxiliary output (regulation control capability enables system 10 to use dc power bus while powering the auxiliary loads 34, charging the battery 30, Kocher (0072)).
Regarding claim 12, Kocher in view of Thomas teaches he method of claim 1, wherein the sensor is a DC power bus sensor (the sensor circuit 70 measures dc bus voltage VBUS of the power bus 18, Kocher (0040 and see annotated FIG. 3), thus, sensor circuit 70 is a DC power bus sensor).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 09/24/2025, see Remarks page 5 – 7, have been fully considered and the following responses is given herein.
Regarding the Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b)
The amendment to the claims is sufficient to overcome the indefiniteness rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) made to claims 1 – 5 in the Non-Final Rejection on 03/25/2025. As such, those rejections are withdrawn.
Regarding the Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant amended independent claims 1 and 6 to recite the power demands (demand characteristics) on the power bus is monitored by a sensor directly connected to the power bus and argued that the primary reference Kocher does not teach such directly connected sensor to the power bus to monitor power demand of the power bus.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
As indicated in the current rejection and illustrated the annotated FIG.3 of Kocher included herein, Kocher explicitly discloses that circuit 70 implemented in controller 12, is a sensor that measures directly the bi-directional converter current I Bi, and its corresponding setpoint value I Bi*, dc bus voltage VBUS, and battery voltage VBAT, (0040 and see annotated FIG. 3) and as illustrated in FIG.3, the bus voltage VBUS is a direct input to the sensor circuit 70 that is implemented in the controller 12. Thus, sensor circuit 70 is directly connected power bus (Vbus) to measure/sense bus volage. Thus, the Examiner submits that Kocher still teaches the amended limitations of claim 1 and 6.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DILNESSA B BELAY whose telephone number is (571)272-3136. The examiner can normally be reached M-F approx. 8:00 am - 5:30 pm EST.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571)270-5095. 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.
/DILNESSA B BELAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights