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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 7, 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 7, line 2 recites “The” and should be corrected to “the”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12, line 2 recites “The” and should be corrected to “the”. Appropriate correction is required.
Information Disclosure Statement
Examiner notes that IDS filed on 4/16/2024 lists US Patents and US Patent Publications that were previously considered or listed as related prior art in the parent application.
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, 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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rozman et al. (US 2014/0028094) in view of Rippel (US 5,099,187).
Please note that Rozman and Rippel references were used in the rejection of parent application claims.
Regarding Claim 1, Rozman discloses a safety protection circuit (Figures 1-7), comprising:
N (N >2) main switch units (Main-SUs) (comprising 26 in 14a-14d, N > 2, Figures 1-2) for connecting to N electrical targets (load 16a-16d, Figure 1), wherein each Main-SU selected from the N Main-SUs is connected to a main DC bus and is associated with one of the N electrical targets (a first ends of 26 in 14a-14b are commonly connected to 18 and second ends are respectively connected to load 16a-16d, Figure 1);
a semiconductor switch unit (Semi-SU) connected to the main DC bus (comprising 12 connected to main DC bus 18, Figures 1,3);
N auxiliary switch unit (Aux-SUs) (comprising 28 in 14a-14d, Figures 1-2), having one-to-one associations with N Main-SUs (26 having associated 28 in each of 14a-14d, Figures 1-2), wherein for each Aux-SU selected from the N Aux-SUs and associated with a corresponding Main-SU, the Aux-SU is connected to the Semi-SU and the corresponding Main-SU (14a-14d connected to Semi-SU 12 and each Aux-SU 28 associated with corresponding Main-SU 26 in 14a-14d, Figures 1-2); and
a control module coupled with the Semi-SU and the N Aux-Sus (comprising 17 coupled with the Semi-SU 12 and the N Aux-Sus 28, Figure 1), wherein the control module is configured to
receive a target control instruction (control instruction to start pre-charge, Figures 4-5, provide power and monitor fault, Figures 4-5),
when the target control instruction is to pre-charge a first set of electrical targets among the N electrical targets (control instruction to start pre-charge, 40, 62, 96, Figures 4-5 respectively),
select a first set of Main-SUs from the N Main-SUs that are associated with the first set of electrical targets, and select a first set of Aux-SUs from the N Aux-SUs that are associated with the first set of Main-SUs (controlling 28 in corresponding 14 in 14a-14d by ON/OFF control signal 24a’-24d’ from 17 to be in a first on/off state, Figures 1-2, first capacitive load, 68, Figure 5, Paragraph 19),
control each of the first set of Aux-SUs to be in a continuous-on state (46, Figure 4, 68, Figure 5),
control the Semi-SU to be in an intermittent-on state to allow pre-charging of the electrical targets via the Semi-SU and the first set of Aux-Sus (Figure 4, Paragraph 22, “….At step 44, PMAD controller 17 regulates the voltage on auxiliary DC bus 20 to an initial level. In the embodiment shown in FIG. 3, PMAD controller 17 modulates control signal 22 to control the duty cycle of regulator switch 32 (shown in FIG. 3) to regulate the output voltage of power converter 12”),
after the first set of electrical targets are pre-charged, control the first set of Main-SUs to be in a turn-on state (52, Figure 4), and
control the first set of Aux-SUs to be in a turn-off state and then control the Semi-SU to be in a turn off state (52, 56/exit pre-charge, Figure 4).
Rozman does not specifically disclose the main DC bus source (in Figures) as a battery.
Rippel discloses a safety protection circuit (Sole Figure), comprising: N auxiliary switch units (comprising contacts 17, 19 in 18) in one-to-one association with N control switch units (comprising contacts 11, 13 in 12), wherein the control switch units are arranged on power transmission lines of a battery (comprising positive power transmission lines and negative power transmission lines from positive electrode 30 and negative electrode 44 of battery 10, Column 2, lines 47-50, “a battery stack or other DC power source 10…”), and a semiconductor switch unit (comprising 34, 68), connected to the control switch units via the auxiliary switch units (comprising contacts 17, 189 in 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the safety circuit of Rozman, to provide in the safety protection circuit of Rozman, a battery as a DC source as taught by Ripple, to provide reliable, safe DC power for charging and operating power to the circuit.
Regarding Claim 2, combination of Rozman and Rippel discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 1, wherein in the intermittent-on state, the Semi-SU is intermittently turned on by repeatedly being in alternating on-state for a period of time and off-state for another period of time (Rozman, Paragraph 22, “….At step 44, PMAD controller 17 regulates the voltage on auxiliary DC bus 20 to an initial level. In the embodiment shown in FIG. 3, PMAD controller 17 modulates control signal 22 to control the duty cycle of regulator switch 32 (shown in FIG. 3) to regulate the output voltage of power converter 12”, Paragraph 28).
Regarding Claim 3, combination of Rozman and Rippel discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 2, wherein the Semi-SU is intermittently turned on based on a pre-charging rate, and the pre-charging rate is adjustable in accordance with a duty ratio in the target control instruction (Rozman, Paragraph 22, “….At step 44, PMAD controller 17 regulates the voltage on auxiliary DC bus 20 to an initial level. In the embodiment shown in FIG. 3, PMAD controller 17 modulates control signal 22 to control the duty cycle of regulator switch 32 (shown in FIG. 3) to regulate the output voltage of power converter 12”, Paragraph 28).
Regarding Claim 7, combination of Rozman and Rippel discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 1, wherein: the N Main-SUs are arranged on positive or negative power transmission lines connecting to the battery (26 in 14a-14d arranged on Main DC bus POS 18, Figures 1-2).
Regarding Claim 8, combination of Rozman and Rippel discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 1, wherein when the target control instruction is to switch a second set of electrical targets among the N electrical targets (one or more of the loads 14a-14d not selected in the first set), the control module is further configured to
select a second set of Main-SUs from the N Main-SUs that are associated with the second set of electrical targets, and select a second set of Aux-SUs from the N Aux-SUs that are associated with the second set of Main-Sus (comprising 78, Figure 5),
upon a determination that the Semi-SU is not turned on, control the second set of Aux-SUs to be in a continuous-on state, control the Semi-SU to be in the continuous-on state (“turn-on Semi-Su…” in 74, “turn-on auxiliary switch of hybrid SSCB”, 78, Figure 5),
control the second set of Main-SUs to switch (comprising 80, Figure 5), and
after the second set of electrical targets are switched, control the second set of Aux-SUs to be in a turn-off state and then control the Semi-SU to be in a turn off state (82, turn-off Aux-Su in 84 followed by “announce pre-charge complete” 88 and exit pre-charge 90, Figure 5).
Regarding Claim 9, combination of Rozman and Rippel discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 8, wherein the controlling the second set of Main-SUs to switch includes controlling each of the second set of Main-Sus to switch from its previous on or off state to the other state (all main-Sus previously turned on at 64, “turn-off main switch…”, 64 and “turn-on main switch…” at 84, Figure 5).
Regarding Claim 10, combination of Rozman and Rippel discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 8, wherein when one of the second set of electrical targets is a charging apparatus, the controlling of the second set of Aux-SUs to be in the continuous-on state (step 78) comprising:
controlling the Aux-SU among the second set of Aux-SUs which is associated with the charging apparatus to be in the continuous-on state (step 78);
controlling rest of the second set of Aux-SUs to be in the off state until the charging apparatus completes charging the battery (charging/capacitive load selected in the second set); and controlling, once the Aux-SU associated with the charging apparatus is in the off state, the rest of the second set of Aux-SUs to be in the continuous-on state (charging/capacitive load selected in the second set).
Regarding Claim 11, combination of Rozman and Rippel discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 10, wherein the N electrical targets include a motor, a charging apparatus, and one or more high-voltage electronic devices (Paragraph 19, “…Pre-charge is implemented by utilizing power supplied by auxiliary DC bus 20 to charge the one or more capacitive loads…”).
Regarding Claim 12, combination of Rozman and Rippel discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 1, wherein the set of electrical targets comprises one or more electrical targets (one or more of 16a-16d, Paragraph 19).
Claim 13 recites a safety protection circuit substantially similar to that of Claim 1, except for specifying Main-SU connection to the battery and N electrical targets by specifying being connected to an electrode of a battery and the other end of the Main-SU is connected to an associated one of the N electrical targets (claim 1 recites Main-SU is connected to an electrode of a battery) and will be similarly rejected as Claim 1.
Claims 14-18 recite a method corresponding to the safety protection circuit of Claims 1-2, 8-9 respectively. Therefore, Claims 14-18 are rejected at least for the same reasons as for Claims 1-2, 8-9 respectively.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rozman et al. (US 2014/0028094) in view of Rippel (US 5,099,187) and Mori (US 4,922,365).
Please note that Mori reference was previously used in the parent application claims.
Regarding Claim 4, combination of Rozman and Ripple does not specifically disclose the safety protection circuit of Claim 1, wherein the circuit further comprises: a buffer protection module, connected in parallel with the Semi-SU, wherein the buffer protection module is configured to mitigate an impact on the Semi-SU caused by a surge current.
Mori discloses a semiconductor switch unit (Semi-SU) connected to a battery and a load and comprising a buffer protection module, connected in parallel with the Semi-SU, wherein the buffer protection module is configured to mitigate an impact on the Semi-SU caused by a surge current (module comprising 61, 62, connected across semiconductor switch unit 2, Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the combination of Rozman and Rippel, a buffer protection module as taught by Mori, to protect the semiconductor switch unit from overvoltage.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rozman et al. (US 2014/0028094) in view of Rippel (US 5,099,187) and Zhang et al. (US 2017/0025957).
Regarding Claim 5, combination of Rozman and Ripple discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 1, further comprises the control module configured to determine whether the pre-charging of the first electrical target is completed by comparing the voltage on DC Aux bus with a preset voltage value (50, Figure 4, 72, 82, Figure 5, Paragraphs 25, 30-31).
Combination of Rozman and Ripple does not specifically disclose a sampling module configured to collect a sample voltage from sampling point in between the Semi-SU and the first set of Aux-SUs, and the voltage compared to the preset voltage value being the sample voltage.
Zhang discloses a sensing circuit (Figures 1, 4) comprising a sampling module (comprising U1, Figure 1) configured to collect a sample voltage from sampling point in between a first circuit element and a second circuit element (sample voltage from sampling point between R1, R3, Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the combination, a sampling module as taught by Zhang, such that sample voltage cab be hold for further processing/comparison.
Regarding Claim 6, combination of Rozman, Ripple and Zhang discloses the safety protection circuit of Claim 5, associated with an isolated converter and further comprising a holding circuit (voltage sampling and holding circuit 42, Figure 4, Abstract voltage sensing circuit in an isolated converter). Combination of Rozman, Ripple and Zhang does not specifically disclose an isolation module coupled with the sampling module, wherein the isolation module is configured to collect the sample voltage from the sampling module. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the combination, an isolation module to provide isolation between the low voltage and high voltage circuitry.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Weng et al. (US 2011/0111268) discloses in Figures 1, 2A, a safety protection circuit for a vehicle comprising control switch units (contactor 1A, 1B, Figure 2A) in both positive and negative transmission lines connected to battery and load (positive and negative line connected to battery 210 and load 260, Figure 2A); Zhang et al. (US 2021/0097785) discloses a safety protection circuit (Figure 2), comprising N first control switch units (comprising S1/204, S2/206, S3/208, S4/210, Figure 2) are arranged on power transmission lines of a battery (comprising 216, 218, 220 coupled to battery 124 and load side circuit comprising 229, 231, 228, 226, Figure 2), wherein the power transmission lines of the battery comprise positive power transmission lines of the battery (comprising 216, Figure 2) and/or negative power transmission lines of the battery (comprising 218, 220, Figure 2); wherein the positive power transmission line comprise at least two control switch units (S1, S2, Figure 2) with a first end connected to the positive electrode of the battery and a second end connected to a port which is connected one or more of loads; wherein the negative power transmission lines comprise at least two control switch units (S3, S4, Figure 2) with a first end connected to the negative electrode of the battery (a first end of S3, S4 connected to negative electrode 214 of 124, Figure 2) and a second end connected a first port and a second port respectively (a second end of S3 first port connected to S3 and 232, 231, 228, a second end of S4 connected to 226, Figure 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCY M THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-6002. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:30 am - 5:30 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, Crystal L Hammond can be reached at (571)270-1682. 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.
/LUCY M THOMAS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2838, 5/26/2026 /CRYSTAL L HAMMOND/ Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights