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 .
DRAWINGS
The drawings are objected to because FIG.3A, 3B shows a power signal Wa and no units shown (Amps/volts)? Applicant’s does not reference Corrected command rotation speed Rc not shown (see fig.1, spec, para. [0044]-[0045]).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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, 3, and 6 are rejected due to unclear subject-matter. As to claim 1, the phrase “a voltage detection part configured to detect a voltage of the drive signal as a load voltage” is unclear in that applicants’ specification (see para. [0024], page 4 of spec.) teaches that the voltage detection part 2a detects the supply voltage of the motor drive circuit 3.
As to claim 1, the phrase, “a power limitation part configured to detect a load power of the drive circuit based on the load voltage and the load current” is unclear in that applicant’s spec. (see para. [0039]) teaches the power limitation part 1b calculates the load power Wa of the motor drive circuit 3 by multiplying the load voltage by the load current” and therefore detection of load power is not clear. The load power Wa signal is shown in fig.3A/3B of applicants. Is the load power Wa (driving load) (see spec, para. [0039]) a current or voltage signal as no units shown (Amps/volts)?
As to claim 3, the phrase, “The motor control device according to claim 1, wherein the power limitation part releases the power limitation in response to the load power being lower than a predetermined release value, a host command rotation speed lower than a current command rotation speed being designated, and the load power being lower than the release value” is unclear as to power limitation part releases the power limitation in response to the load power being lower than a predetermined release value. Is the power limitation release means the power limitation turned OFF from ON (see applicant’s fig.3A, 3B, para. [0070])? In general the phrase, “releases the power limitation” meaning allowing power limiting. Therefore it is unlcear as to whether limiting power or turning OFF power limitation?
a host command rotation speed lower than a current command rotation speed being designated is not clear relative to (fig.3A, 3B). Fig. 3A/ 3B shows command rotation speed R is shown lower than the Host command rotation speed RO.
As to claim 6, the phrase, “a rotation command correction step of implementing power limitation by decreasing the rotation command value” is not clear as applicant’s fig. 2, step S6 shows as a rotation decrease processing (see spec., para’s [0042]-[0043]). Corrected rotation command Rc not shown or referenced in applicant’s figs. Applicant’s para. [0043]) states corrects the command rotation speed Rb during power limitation into a corrected command rotation speed Rc indicating the rotation speed lower than the host command rotation speed R0 (Rc Lower than R0 not shown in figs.1-3). Applicant’s fig.2, shows setting of command rotation speed Rb (step S21) is performed when there is no Power limitation (step S2, No). Therefor it is not clear how the decreasing the rotation command value is performed?
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JE et al. (Pub.No.: US 2016/0233816 A1 and JE hereinafter) in view of Sato Toshiaki et al. (prior art of record – JP 2001286179 A and Toshiaki hereinafter).
As to claim 1, A motor control device for controlling a motor by supplying a drive signal generated based on a rotation command value by a drive circuit to the motor, the motor control device comprising:
a voltage detection part configured to detect a voltage of the drive signal as a load voltage;
a current detection part configured to detect a current of the drive signal as a load current; and
a power limitation part configured to detect a load power of the drive circuit based on the load voltage and the load current, and decrease the rotation command value in response to the load power exceeding a predetermined upper limit value to perform power limitation.
(As to claim 1, JE shows (figs.2, 3-4, para. [0026]) A motor control device [motor driver 220] for controlling a motor 230 by supplying a drive signal [Sic] (fig.3-4, para. [0046]) generated based on a rotation command value ωr* by a drive circuit [430] (fig.4, para. [0024]) to the motor 230, the motor control device [motor driver 220] comprising:
a voltage detection part [B] configured to detect a voltage of the drive signal [supply voltage signal] (figs.3-4) as a load voltage (output voltage V0 applied to the motor 230, see para. [0023], [0047], [0060]);
a current detection part [E] (fig.3-4, para’s [0023], [0035], [0036]-[0037]) configured to detect a current of the drive signal (outputted via inverter 420, see figs.3-4) as a load (motor 230) current [iO]; and
a power limitation part [CURRENT LIMITING UNIT 375] (FIG.4) configured to detect a load power [Pca] (see para. [0047]) or motor driver voltage Vdc, see figs.3-4) of the drive circuit 430 based on the load voltage [motor driver voltage Vdc or output voltage Vo] and the load current [iO], and Je teaches decrease the rotation speed of the motor 230 (in overvoltage protection mode, see para. [0053], [0063], [0076]) in response to the load power [motor driver voltage Vdc] exceeding a predetermined upper limit value [first predetermined value] or [Vdc ref] (see figs. 5A, steps S510 thru S535 and fig.8, para. [0080]-[0081]) to perform power (current) limitation (via current limiting unit 375, see figs. 4, 5A-5B, 8 and para’s [0048], [0050], [0051], [0052]-[0053], [0054]-[0055], [0076], [0080]-[0081]).
JE does not mention decrease the rotation command value.
Sato Toshiaki teaches (see JP 2001286179 A, figs.3/4 of figs. 1-17) reduce the rotational speed command value (see step [SP2], fig.3 or step SP9, fig.4, see description of flow charts of figs.3-4, pages 12-14) when the detected motor current is greater than the overload determination value (see fig.3, step Sp1, Yes or fig.4, step SP1, yes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to decrease the rotation command value of Sato Toshiaki in the system of JE because thereby limiting motor current and can be prevented from overheating (see Sato Toshiaki, page 7, para’s 5-6).
As to claim 4, The motor control device according to claim 1, wherein the voltage detection part detects a supply voltage supplied to the drive circuit as the load voltage.
(As to claim 4, JE teaches (figs.2, 3, 4, 5A-5B-8) the motor control device [motor driver 220] according to claim 1, wherein a voltage detection part [B] detects a supply voltage [Vdc] supplied to the drive circuit 430 (figs.3-4) as a load (motor) voltage (see para. [0023], [0047], [0060]);
As to claim 6, A motor control method for controlling a motor by supplying a drive signal generated based on a rotation command value by a drive circuit to the motor, the motor control method comprising:
a load power detection step of detecting a load power of the drive circuit based on a load voltage and a load current of the drive circuit; and
a rotation command value correction step of implementing power limitation by decreasing the rotation command value in response to the load power exceeding a predetermined upper limit value.
(As to claim 6, JE shows (figs.2, 3-4, 5A-5B, 8-11B, para. [0012]) a motor control method (see figs.5A, 5B) for controlling a motor 230 by supplying a drive signal Sic (figs.3-4) generated based on a rotation command value [ωr*] by a drive circuit [430] (fig.4, para. [0024]) to the motor 230, the motor control method (fig. 5A-5B) comprising:
a [CURRENT LIMITING UNIT 375] (FIG.4) configured to detect a load power [Pca] (see para. [0047]) or motor driver voltage Vdc, see figs.3-4) of the drive circuit 420/430 based on the load voltage [motor driver voltage Vdc or output voltage Vo] (see para. [0023], [0047], [0060]); and a load current [iO] of the drive circuit [420/430] (see figs.3-4, relative method steps fig.5A, 5B); and
a rotation command value [ωr*] correction step (via difference subtractor ωr*- ωr, see fig.4, para. [0042], JE teaches rotating speed of motor 230 increased and decreased, see para’s [0053], [0056], fig.11A) of implementing power limitation via [current limiting unit 375] (fig.4) and Je teaches decrease the rotation speed of the motor 230 (in overvoltage protection mode, see para. [0053], [0063], [0076]) in response to the load power [motor driver voltage Vdc] exceeding a predetermined upper limit value [first predetermined value] or [Vdc ref] (see figs. 5A, steps S510 thru S535 and fig.8, para. [0080]-[0081]) to perform power (current) limitation (via current limiting unit 375, see figs. 4, 5A-5B, 8 and para’s [0048], [0050], [0051], [0052]-[0053], [0054]-[0055], [0076], [0080]-[0081]).
JE does not mention decrease the rotation command value.
Sato Toshiaki teaches (see JP 2001286179 A, figs.3/4 of figs. 1-17) reduce the rotational speed command value (see step [SP2], fig.3 or step SP9, fig.4, see description of flow charts of figs.3-4, pages 12-14) when the detected motor current is greater than the overload determination value (see fig.3, step Sp1, Yes or fig.4, step SP1, yes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to decrease the rotation command value of Sato Toshiaki in the system of JE because thereby limiting motor current and can be prevented from overheating (see Sato Toshiaki, page 7, para’s 5-6).
Allowable Subject-Matter
Claims 2, 3, and 5 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.
Claim 3 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As to claim 2, (JE and Sato Toshiaki) fails to teach the power limitation part increases the rotation command value in response to the load power being lower than a predetermined lower limit value. Claim 5 depend on allowable claim 2.
As to claim 3, (JE and Sato Toshiaki) fails to teach the power limitation part releases the power limitation in response to the load power being lower than a predetermined release value, a host command rotation speed lower than a current command rotation speed being designated, and the load power being lower than the release value.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTONY M PAUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1608. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am to 4 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, Mr. Eduardo Colon Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/ANTONY M PAUL/
Primary Examiner of Art Unit 2846