DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is in response to the election filed on 1/20/26.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
3. Applicant's election with traverse of Species 2 (figures 1-3, and 5 directed to claims 1-4, 6, 8-13, 16-18, and 20; Claims 5, 7, 14-15, and 19 have been withdrawn) in the reply filed on 12/5/25 is acknowledged.
The traversal is on the ground(s) that “the Election of Species is not "mutually exclusive" because Figures 1-3 are listed for all eleven species. Hence, Figures 1-3 are generic. Moreover, the Examiner has neither shown that the species have "mutually exclusive characteristics" nor demonstrated that there is a "serious search and/or examination burden.”
This is not found persuasive because Species 2, figure 5 shows the capacitors C1, C2 are connected between Bus +/-; filter capacitor unit 1b is connected to filter capacitor unit 2b; and the switch unit 4a connected to nodes 108, 109 of the filter capacitor unit and directly connected to the N wire of module 3a.
The configuration shown in figure 5, which includes the switching unit 4a, differs from the configuration illustrated in figures 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 14.
In addition, the configuration shown in figures 6 and 12, which includes the filter inductor unit 22b, differs from the configuration illustrated in figure 5.
Moreover, the configuration shown in figure 13, which includes the switch transistors M1, M2, differs from the configuration illustrated in figure 5.
For the reasons as stated above. The species are independent or distinct to the different species recite the mutually exclusive characteristics of such species. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record.
There is a serious search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply:
--the species or groupings of patentably indistinct species have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification;
--the species or groupings of patentably indistinct species have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; and/or
--the species or groupings of patentably indistinct species require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Upon further review, clam 13 should has been withdrawn, because claim 13 is directed to the non-elected Species 10 (figure 7).
Claim Objections
4. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 5, recites “the filter capacitor group” should be replaced with “a filter capacitor group”.
Claim 1, line 7, recites “the switch unit” should be replaced with “a switch unit”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, lines 2, recites the limitation “the inverter bridge arm”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-4 and 6-12 are rejected due to their dependency of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-4, 6, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wieser et al. (US 20230116269) in view of Zhang Fenggang (CN108336920, also see English translation).
Regarding claim 1: Wieser et al. disclose (i.e. figures 1-4 and 7) an inverter (i.e. 2) apparatus, comprising:
a direct current bus (i.e. DC+/-), wherein the direct current bus (i.e. DC+/-) is connected to the inverter bridge arm (i.e. arm of 2), and the bus capacitor (i.e. Czk1, Czk2) is connected between a positive direct current bus (i.e. DC+) and a negative direct current bus (i.e. DC-),
a filter circuit (i.e. 3); connected between the inverter bridge arm (i.e. 2) and a user load (i.e. 7), wherein the filter capacitor group (i.e. inductors and capacitors filter group) of the filter circuit (i.e. 3) is configured to connect to an N wire (i.e. N) of the user load (i.e. 7) by using the switch unit (i.e. 4); and
a controller (i.e. controller for figure 7), configured to control, based on different working states (i.e. operation state) of the inverter (i.e. 2) apparatus, the switch unit (i.e. 4) to be turned on or off, so as to switch different modulation modes (i.e. modes according to switch 4 on and off) of the inverter bridge arm (i.e. arm of 2),
wherein the different working states comprise an on-grid working state (i.e. normal operation) (i.e. ¶ 60-68, 73-87, and 103),
but does not specifically disclose an off-grid working state with a balanced load, and an off-grid working state with an unbalanced load.
Fenggang discloses a power supply (i.e. figures 3-4) comprising an off-grid working state with a balanced load (i.e. ¶ 18), and an off-grid working state with an unbalanced load (i.e. ¶ 19) (i.e. ¶ 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Jared Hausman’s invention with the power system as disclose by Fenggang to improve conversion efficiency under normal operating conditions, and meet the requirements of unbalanced loads is a major technical problem that needs to be solved.
Regarding claim 2: Wieser et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the controller is configured to: when the inverter apparatus is in the off-grid working state with an unbalanced load, control the switch unit to be turned on, and control the inverter bridge arm to switch to a common SPWM modulation mode; and when the inverter apparatus is in the on-grid working state, control the switch unit to be turned off, and control the inverter bridge arm to switch to a common-mode injection modulation mode.
Fenggang disclose a power system (i.e. figures 3-4) comprising the controller is configured to: when the inverter apparatus is in the off-grid working state with an unbalanced load, control the switch unit (i.e. SW) to be turned on, and control the inverter bridge arm (i.e. inverter of figure 3) to switch to a common SPWM modulation mode (i.e. ¶ 19); and
when the inverter apparatus is in the on-grid working state, control the switch unit (i.e. SW) to be turned off, and control the inverter bridge arm (i.e. inverter of figure 3) to switch to a common-mode injection modulation mode (i.e. ¶ 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Wieser et al.’s invention with the power system as disclose by Fenggang to improve conversion efficiency under normal operating conditions, and meet the requirements of unbalanced loads is a major technical problem that needs to be solved.
Regarding claim 3: Wieser et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the controller is configured to: when the inverter apparatus is in the off-grid working state with an unbalanced load, control the switch unit to be turned on, and control the inverter bridge arm to switch to a common SPWM modulation mode; and when the inverter apparatus is in the off-grid working state with a balanced load, control the switch unit to be turned off, and control the inverter bridge arm to switch to a common-mode injection modulation mode.
Fenggang disclose a power system (i.e. figures 3-4) comprising the controller is configured to: when the inverter (i.e. inverter of figure 3) apparatus is in the off-grid working state with an unbalanced load, control the switch unit (i.e. SW) to be turned on, and control the inverter bridge arm (i.e. inverter arm of figure 3) to switch to a common SPWM modulation mode (i.e. ¶ 19);
and when the inverter (i.e. inverter of figure 3) apparatus is in the off-grid working state with a balanced load, control the switch unit (i.e. SW) to be turned off, and control the inverter bridge arm (i.e. inverter arm of figure 3) to switch to a common-mode injection modulation mode (i.e. ¶ 19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Wieser et al.’s invention with the power system as disclose by Fenggang to improve conversion efficiency under normal operating conditions, and meet the requirements of unbalanced loads is a major technical problem that needs to be solved.
Regarding claim 4: Wieser et al. disclsoes (i.e. figure 7) wherein the common end of the filter capacitor group (i.e. capacitor group of 3) of the filter circuit is further connected to a midpoint (i.e. MP) of the bus capacitor (i.e. Czk1, Czk2).
Regarding claims 6 and 20: Wieser et al. disclsoes (i.e. figure 7) wherein the filter circuit (i.e. 3) comprises a first filter inductor unit (i.e. inductor unit of 3) and a filter capacitor unit (i.e. capacitor unit of 3); the first filter inductor unit (i.e. inductor unit of 3) comprises three filter inductors (i.e. LF1-3), and first ends of the three filter inductors of the first filter inductor unit are sequentially connected to three output ends of the inverter bridge arm (i.e. arm of 2);
the filter capacitor unit (i.e. capacitor unit of 3) comprises the filter capacitor group, the filter capacitor group comprises three filter capacitors (i.e. CF1-3), first ends of the three filter capacitors of the filter capacitor group are sequentially connected to second ends of the three filter inductors of the first filter inductor unit (i.e. inductor unit of 3) , and second ends of the three filter capacitors of the filter capacitor group (i.e. capacitor unit of 3) are connected to the common end (i.e. end connect to 4) of the filter capacitor group; and
a first end of the switch unit (i.e. 4) is connected to the midpoint (i.e. MP) of the bus capacitor (i.e. Czk1, Czk2) by using the common end of the filter capacitor group (i.e. capacitor unit of 3), and a second end of the switch unit (i.e. 4) is configured to connect to the N wire (i.e. N) of the user load.
Regarding claims 16: the method steps will be met during the normal operation of the apparatus described above. (Examiner notes: For method claims, 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 will inherently perform 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).
Regarding claim 17: Wieser et al. disclose (i.e. figure 7) the inverter comprises a direct current bus (i.e. DC+/-), a bus capacitor (i.e. Czk1, Czk2), an inverter bridge arm (i.e. arm of 2), a filter circuit (i.e. inductors and capacitors filter), a switch unit (i.e. 4), and a controller (i.e. controller of figure 7), the direct current bus is connected to the inverter bridge arm (i.e. arm of 2), the bus capacitor (i.e. Czk1, Czk2) is connected between a positive direct current bus (i.e. DC+) and a negative direct current bus (i.e. DC-), the filter circuit (i.e. inductors and capacitors filter) is connected between the inverter bridge arm (i.e. arm of 2) and a user load (i.e. 7), and a common end of a filter capacitor group (i.e. Capacitor filter) of the filter circuit is configured to connect to an N wire (i.e. N) of the user load (i.e. 7) by using the switch unit (i.e. 4).
Regarding claim 18: Wieser et al. disclose (i.e. figure 7) the common end of the filter capacitor group (i.e. capacitors filter group) of the filter circuit is further connected to a midpoint (i.e. MP) of the bus capacitor (i.e. Czk1, Czk2).
10. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wieser et al. (US 20230116269) in view of Zhang Fenggang (CN108336920, also see English translation) and further in view of Unru et al. (US 20160254783).
Regarding claim 8: Wieser et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the filter capacitor unit further comprises a safety capacitor group; and the safety capacitor group comprises three filter capacitors, first ends of the three filter capacitors of the safety capacitor group are sequentially configured to connect to three input ends of the user load, and second ends of the three filter capacitors of the safety capacitor group are connected to a common end of the safety capacitor group.
Unru et al. disclose a power system (i.e. figure 2a) comprising the filter capacitor unit further comprises a safety capacitor group (i.e. 62a-c); and the safety capacitor group (i.e. 62a-c) comprises three filter capacitors, first ends of the three filter capacitors of the safety capacitor group (i.e. 62a-c) are sequentially configured to connect to three input ends of the user load (i.e. load), and second ends of the three filter capacitors of the safety capacitor group (i.e. 62a-c) are connected to a common end (i.e. at 64) of the safety capacitor group (i.e. 62a-c).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Wieser et al.’s invention with the system as disclose by Unru et al. to increase the accuracy when determining the capacitance values.
11. Claims 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wieser et al. (US 20230116269) in view of Zhang Fenggang (CN108336920, also see English translation) and Unru et al. (US 20160254783) and further in view of Joachim Danmayr (EP3562016A1, cited in the IDS filed on 9/11/24).
Regarding claim 9: Wieser et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the common end of the safety capacitor group is connected to the second end of the switch unit.
Danmayr disclose a power system (i.e. figure 3) comprising the common end of the safety capacitor group (i.e. C41-43) is connected to the second end of the switch unit (i.e. SFN).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Wieser et al.’s invention with the power system as disclose by Danmayr to allow reliable charging of the DC link capacitors of an inverter.
Regarding claim 10: Wieser et al. disclsoes (i.e. figure 7) the common end of the safety capacitor group (i.e. CF4-6) is connected to the first end of the switch unit (i.e. 4).
Regarding claim 11: Wieser et al. disclose (i.e. figure 7) the common end of the safety capacitor group (i.e. CF4-6) is connected to the first end or the second end of the switch unit (i.e. 4) by using a capacitor (i.e. CF4).
Regarding claim 12: Wieser et al. disclose (i.e. figure 7) wherein the filter circuit further comprises a second filter inductor unit (i.e. Lemv1-3), the second filter inductor unit (i.e. Lemv1-3) comprises three filter inductors, and the three filter inductors of the second filter inductor unit (i.e. Lemv1-3) are respectively connected between the first ends of the three filter capacitors (i.e. CF1-3) of the filter capacitor group and the first ends of the three filter capacitors (i.e. CF4-6) of the safety capacitor group.
Conclusion
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1269. The examiner can normally be reached Flex: M-F 8-7.
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, Monica Lewis can be reached at 571-272-1838. 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.
/Nguyen Tran/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838