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 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 1-13 are 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.
Regarding independent claims 1 and 10, the Examiner is unsure what the terms “house power”, “fuel tender loads”, and/or “resistor grid” mean. They are general terms and the specification lacks a clear description of what they mean. The Examiner will interpret the term “house power” to mean power provided to elements “in house” meaning powering elements that are inside the vehicle. The Examiner requests the Applicant explicitly state what these terms mean in response to this Office Action.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Ono (2018/0178775).
Regarding independent claims 1 and 10, Ono teaches (Fig. 1) a system and method comprising:
an energy provision system (36 and 48) configured to provide a first voltage (42b);
a first converter (40) configured to increase the first voltage from the energy provision system from the first voltage into at least a second voltage (42a)([0032]);
a traction system (32, 34) of a vehicle configured to be powered by the second voltage from the first converter;
a second converter (54) configured to decrease the first voltage from the energy provision system from the first voltage to a third voltage (42c) which is less than the second voltage ([0034]); and
an auxiliary system (52) of the vehicle configured to be powered by the third voltage of from the second converter that is less than the second voltage,
wherein the auxiliary system comprises one or more of house power (to power control unit 70; [0033]), a hydraulic pump, a fuel tender loads, and a resistor grid.
Regarding claim 2, Ono teaches the energy provision system includes a bank of two or more energy systems (36 and 48), each of the two or more energy systems independently connected through the first converter (40) to the traction system (32, 34), the two or more energy systems configured such that one or more of the two or more energy systems are configured to power the auxiliary system (via 54).
Regarding claim 4, Ono teaches the traction system includes one or more of a traction inverter (34), a traction motor (32), and a resistor grid.
Regarding claim 5, Ono teaches the auxiliary system includes implements for maintenance of wayside vehicle ([0033]; lights to see in the dark).
Regarding claim 6, Ono teaches the auxiliary system of the vehicle is configured to be powered by the third voltage (42c) from the second converter (54) separately of the traction system (32, 34) of the vehicle being powered by the second voltage (42a) from the first converter (40).
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) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ono (2018/0178775) and Kitanaka (2011/0166736).
Ono teaches the system as described above. Ono also teaches the auxiliary system further comprises a thermal management system (i.e. seat heater) ([0033]). Ono fails to explicitly teach the auxiliary system comprising an air compressor. Kitanaka teaches a similar system (Fig. 1) to that of Ono. Kitanaka teaches a traction system (50, 71) and an auxiliary system (31), just like in Ono’s system. Kitanaka teaches the auxiliary system comprising an air compressor ([0055]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement an air compressor into Ono’s auxiliary system, since Kitanaka teaches a similar auxiliary system comprising an air compressor and Ono was silent as to if an air compressor was included in their auxiliary system and Kitanaka teaches an example where one is included in the auxiliary system.
Claim(s) 7-9 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ono (2018/0178775) and Penney et al. (2024/0239198). Ono teaches the system and method as described above.
Regarding claims 7, 8, 11, and 12, Ono fails to explicitly teach the use of an off-board source to provide power to the vehicle. Penney teaches a similar system and method (Fig. 1) to that of Ono. Penney teaches an energy provision system (124), a first converter (126), a traction system (116), a second converter (128), and an auxiliary system (156).
Penney also teaches the energy provision system configured to receive a charging current and a powering/fourth voltage from an off-board source (136), the charging current configured to charge the energy provision system ([0026]) and the powering/fourth voltage configured to provide power to the traction system ([0027] via 132 and 126). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Penney’s off-board source into Ono’s invention to allow for additional power to be received in the vehicle system to recharge the energy provision system and provide additional power to the traction system as needed.
Also, Penney fails to explicitly teach the fourth voltage (output from off-board source 136) being at or above the second voltage, however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the fourth voltage be at or above the second voltage, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 9, Penney teaches the off-board source including one or more of a trolley line, a catenary, a charging station, or an electrified third rail ([0026]).
Regarding claim 13, Penney teaches recharging an energy storage device with the second voltage ([0024]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 16, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As explained above, the terms used at the end of the independent claims are indefinite and lack a description to inform the Examiner as to what exactly is meant/claimed by these terms. The Examiner, giving these terms their broadest reasonable interpretation, believes that the Ono reference teaches the last indent of the independent claims. Again, the Examiner requests the Applicant explain more explicitly what these terms are meant to mean.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DRU M PARRIES whose telephone number is (571)272-8542. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Thursday from 9:00am to 6:00pm. The examiner can also be reached on alternate Fridays.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Rexford Barnie, can be reached on 571-272-7492. 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
DMP
2/13/2026
/DANIEL KESSIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836