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 .
This non-final office action is responsive to Applicants' application filed on 07/01/24. Claims 1-4 are presented for examination and are pending for the reasons indicated herein below.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
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.
Claims 1 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim uses the term “sometimes” and thus, renders the limitation indefinite since the claim does not positively recite the limitation. For the sake of examining each limitation has been interpreted as diodes operating in bias or unbiased state.
Claims 2-4 depend directly or indirectly from a rejected claim and are, therefore, rejected for the reasons set above.
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 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 20200127581 A1)
Regarding claim 1. Chen teaches a frequency inverter [fig 6-7 with fig 21] comprising: at least three diodes and at least two inductors [Ds1-sn, Li1-in], wherein one of the at least three diodes operates sometimes [i.e. bias operation] in a discharge of one of the at least two inductors [diodes allow current to flow from inductor] and sometimes in the discharge [non-bias operation] of the other inductor [blocks current going in opposite direction];
at least one depolarized capacitor [“depolarized capacitor Cf” has been interpreted as having a passenger in series with inductor allowing for the energy in the inductor to induce a voltage on the capacitor when the inductor is being discharge by altering its polarity, thus, it de-polarizes the inductors terminals, Cf] connected to inverter output terminals; at least four switching keys [Ss1-sn and S11-21], wherein at least two of the four switching keys [current through Ss1-sn switches] are current bidirectional keys [i.e. allowing current to flow in multiple paths]; and a control circuit [¶17, implicit hysteresis control in ¶45].
Regarding claim 2. Chen teaches the frequency inverter, of claim 1, wherein the control circuit is a hysteresis comparator [¶45].
Regarding claim 3. Chen teaches the frequency inverter, of claim 1, wherein a capacitor is connected in parallel to a load [Cf’, fig 21].
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 of this title, 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.
Claim 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20200127581 A1) in view of Hayashi (US 20220311356 A1)
Regarding claim 4. Chen teaches the frequency inverter, of claim 1.
However, Chen does not explicitly mention wherein a voltage divider is connected in parallel to a load, and wherein a voltage sample is sent from a middle of the voltage divider to the control circuit.
Hayashi teaches wherein a voltage divider is connected in parallel to a load, and wherein a voltage sample is sent from a middle of the voltage divider to the control circuit [fig 5, 10-11 with fig 7, 17].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the features of Hayashi in order to provide step down version of the output voltage makes it more manageable so that the controller can handle it without needing extra hardware.
Examiner Note
The examiner cites particular columns and lines numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bryan Perez whose telephone number is (571)272-8837. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Fri. (7:30 – 5:00).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Crystal Hammond, can be reached on (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 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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/BRYAN R PEREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2838