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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/07/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages 5 and 6 with respect to claims 1, 8 and 15 that Jonathan does not convert one type of torque command into another different type of torque command but instead discloses a system that can operate in one mode in which a torque request signal is constant with respect to time but can then switch to a second different mode in which the signal is pulsed. Jonathan does not disclose the conversion of its signal output while operating during the first mode into a different signal type and further argues that the signals identified by 302a/302b would not reasonably be interpreted as the conversion of one type of signal into another different type.
The examiner respectfully disagrees because both 302a and 302b are still two different torque command signals because signal 302a is a time varying signal and signal 302b is a pulsed type with varying frequencies as claimed. The examiner wants to clarify that even though there are two modes, each mode is different as shown in fig. 3. The rejection is maintained accordingly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jonathan GB2576480A.
Regarding claim 15, Jonathan discloses
An electric vehicle (item 600) including a rotating electrical machine (a traction motor, item 202) that wholly, or at least partially, propels the electric vehicle (page 9, lines 9-10), comprising: a control system (item 204, page 9, lines 21-30), including one or more microprocessors (page 6, lines 28-33), configured to electrically couple to a vehicle battery (item 212) and the rotating electrical machine (page 10, lines 5-23. Coupling is done via an inverter 250), wherein the control system generates a continuously time varying torque command (item 302a. Fig. 3 shows a time varying torque command), configured to command the rotating electrical machine to reach an angular velocity (page 11, lines 13-22, page 13, lines 35-37, page 14, lines 1-5); converts the continuously time varying torque command to a dynamic frequency pulsed torque command (item 302b) having a dynamic torque value (substantially equal to the calculated torque requirement 310); and provides the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command to the rotating electrical machine at a varying frequency (page 11, lines 24-37, column 12, lines 1-5, column 20, lines 20-31).
Regarding claim 1, Jonathan discloses
A method of controlling a rotating electrical machine, comprising the steps of: (a) generating a continuously time varying torque command, configured to command the rotating electrical machine to reach an angular velocity; (b) converting the continuously time varying torque command to a dynamic frequency pulsed torque command having a dynamic torque value; and (c) providing the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command to the rotating electrical machine at a varying frequency (see claim 15 rejection for details).
Regarding claim 8, Jonathan discloses
A method of controlling a rotating electrical machine, comprising the steps of: (a) generating a continuously time varying torque command, configured to command the rotating electrical machine to reach an angular velocity; (b) converting the continuously time varying torque command to a dynamic frequency pulsed torque command having a dynamic torque value (see claim 15 rejection for details); (c) determining whether the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command reduces energy loss (high efficiency) relative to the continuously time varying torque command; and (d) providing the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command to the rotating electrical machine at a varying frequency if the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command reduces energy loss relative to the continuously time varying torque command (page 11, lines 13-37, page 12, lines 1-14, page 14, lines 20-31).
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Jonathan discloses
, further comprising the step of selecting a pulse state (from t1 to t2 in fig. 3) of the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command based on an energy output (efficiency) of the rotating electrical machine resulting from the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command compared to an energy output resulting from a continuously time varying command (page 11, lines 13-37, page 12, lines 1-13).
Regarding claims 3 and 10, Jonathan discloses
the step of including a torque value (torque request) with the continuously time varying torque command (page 11, lines 13-22).
Regarding claims 4 and 11, Jonathan discloses
the steps of determining a quantity of energy or torque output by the rotating electrical machine at a commanded torque value (torque request) over a quantity of time (to-t1) using the continuously time varying torque command; and generating the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command having a dynamic torque value (substantially equal to the calculated torque requirement 310) based on the determined quantity of energy or torque output (page 11, lines 13-37, page 12, lines 1-13).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, Jonathan discloses
the step of determining a quantity of energy or torque output by the rotating electrical machine based on the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command over a measured quantity of time (t1-t2) and comparing it to the quantity of energy or torque output determined using the continuously time varying torque value (page 11, lines 13-37, page 12, lines 1-13).
Regarding claims 6 and 13, Jonathan discloses
the steps of establishing the varying frequency of the pulsed torque command using a quantity of energy or torque output by the rotating electrical machine at the continuously time varying torque command relative to a quantity of energy or torque output by the rotating electrical machine at the dynamic frequency pulsed torque command over a measured quantity of time (t1-t2); comparing the quantities; and, when one becomes less than or greater than the other, changing a state of the pulsed torque command (page 11, lines 13-37, page 12, lines 1-13).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Jonathan discloses
, wherein the rotating electrical machine is installed in an electric vehicle (item 600) (page 18, lines 18-21).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BICKEY DHAKAL whose telephone number is (571)272-3577. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-4:30 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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached on 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.
/BICKEY DHAKAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights