DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed 04/30/2024, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 Objections
Claims 1-6 and 11-14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 1, it appears that “the resonant converter stages” (lines 12-14) should be “the plurality of resonant converter stages”.
Re claim 2, it appears that “the resonant converter stages” (line 2) should be “the plurality of resonant converter stages”. It appears that “the plurality of converter stages” (lines 8-9) should be “the plurality of resonant converter stages”. It appears that “respective converter stage” (lines 9, 10) should be “respective resonant converter stage”.
Re claim 3, it appears that “the resonant converter stages” (line 4) should be “the plurality of resonant converter stages”.
Re claim 4, it appears that “the resonant converter stages” (lines 3, 7) should be “the plurality of resonant converter stages”.
Re claim 5, it appears that “the reciprocal” should be “a reciprocal”.
Re claim 6, it appears that “on at least one” (lines 4, 5) should be “on the at least”.
Re claim 11, it appears that “the resonant converter stages” (line 2) should be “the plurality of resonant converter stages”. It appears that “the operating frequency” (lines 2, 3) should be “an operating frequency”.
Re claim 12, it appears that “the converter stages” (line 2) should be “the plurality of resonant converter stages”.
Re claim 13, it appears that “the plurality of converter stages” (line 2) should be “the plurality of resonant converter stages”. It appears that “the same” should be “a same”.
Re claim 14, it appears that “the resonant converter stages” (lines 11, 19) should be “the plurality of resonant converter stages”. It appears that “respective converter stage” (line 26-27) should be “respective resonant converter stage”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 3-8 and 10-13 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Re claim 3, it is unclear if “at least one output signal” (line 4) is the same or different as “the output signal” (lines 10-11) recited in claim 1.
Claims 4-8 inherit the same from claim 3.
Re claim 10, it is unclear if “a switching circuit” (line 4) is the same or different as “a switching circuit” (line 15) recited in claim 1. It is unclear if “a resonant circuit” (line 6) is the same or different as “a resonant circuit” (line 19) recited in claim 1.
Claims 11-13 inherit the same from claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 15 recites “An executable program code”. The claim appears to be directed to a signal per se.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Harrison (WO 2006/043837).
Re claim 1, Harrison teaches a power converter [Fig 16], comprising: a plurality of resonant converter stages [13, 14 , 15, 16 ,17, 18] each comprising an input [4, 6, 8] and an output [22, 24, 26]; a rectifier circuit [28]; and a control circuit [as described in page 7, ln 5-11] configured to control operation of the plurality of resonant converter stages, wherein the input of each of the plurality of converter stages is configured to receive a respective input voltage [from 1, 2, 3], wherein the rectifier circuit is connected to the outputs of the plurality of converter stages and is configured to provide an output signal [output to 29, 30] based on a cascaded voltage that is dependent on converter stage output voltages [as secondary voltages] provided at the outputs of the resonant converter stages, and wherein each of the resonant converter stages comprises: a switching circuit [16, 17, 18] coupled to the input, configured to receive a first alternating voltage [from 1, 2, 3], and configured to generate a second alternating voltage [outputs of 16, 17, 18] based on the first alternating voltage; and a resonant circuit [capacitors in parallel to the transistors as well as the inductors in series with the primary windings] configured to receive the second alternating voltage and coupled to the output.
Re claim 10, Harrison teaches wherein each of the plurality of the resonant converter stages comprises: a switching circuit [16, 17, 18] connected to the input of the resonant converter stage; a resonant circuit [capacitors in parallel to the transistors as well as the inductors in series with the primary windings] connected to the switching circuit; and a transformer [19, 20, 21] comprising a primary winding [Fig 16] connected to the resonant circuit [connected in series to the inductor] and a secondary winding [Fig 16] inductively coupled with the primary winding and connected to the output [22, 24, 26] of the resonant converter stage.
Re claim 11, Harrison teaches wherein the operating frequency of each of the resonant converter stages is the operating frequency of the respective switching circuit [the switching frequency of the switches in 16, 17, 18 determines the operating frequency of each stage].
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(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison in view of Deboy et al. (“Deboy”, US 2018/0278167).
Re claim 12, Harrison teaches the limitations as applied to the claim above but does not teach wherein the resonant circuit of each of the converter stages comprises an LLC circuit with a capacitor, a first inductor, and a second inductor.
Deboy teaches a device [Fig 5A] wherein the resonant circuit of each of the converter stages comprises an LLC circuit with a capacitor [223], a first inductor [221], and a second inductor [222]. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Harrison to include the features of Deboy because it is known for enabling smaller designs with integrated power density, thus improving the utility of the device, which increases efficiency.
Re claim 13, Harrison teaches wherein the transformers of the plurality of converter stages have the same winding ratio [as shown in Fig 16].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9 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.
Claim 14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection set forth in this Office action.
Claim 15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101, 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: the prior art fails to teach or disclose:
Re claim 2 and its dependents thereof, the closet prior art (which has been made of record) fail to disclose (by themselves or in combination): “the control circuit (7) is configured to: adjust an operating frequency of operating the resonant converter stages (1a, 1b, 1c), operate each of the plurality of resonant converter stages in a plurality of successive operating cycles at the same operating frequency, and individually adjust a power transfer duty cycle of each of the plurality of resonant converter stages (1a, 1b, 1c), wherein the power transfer duty cycle of each of the plurality of converter stages (1a, 1b, 1c) is a portion of each operating cycle of the respective converter stage (1a, 1b, 1c) in which power is received by the respective converter stage (1a, 1b, 1c) from the respective input (Ina, Inb, Inc)” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by Applicant.
Re claim 14, the closet prior art (which has been made of record) fail to disclose (by themselves or in combination): “the method comprises: adjusting an operating frequency of operating the resonant converter stages (1a, 1b, 1c); operating each of the plurality of resonant converter stages in a plurality of successive operating cycles at the same adjusted operating frequency; and individually adjusting a power transfer duty cycle of each of the plurality of resonant converter stages (1a, 1b, 1c), wherein the power transfer duty cycle of each of the plurality of resonant converter stages (1a, 1b, 1c) is a portion of each operating cycle of the respective converter stage (1a, 1b, 1c) in which power is received by the respective converter stage (1a, 1b, 1c) from the respective input (Ina, Inb, Inc)” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by Applicant.
Conclusion
Examiner's Note:
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to 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.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAKAISHA JACKSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3111. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MONICA LEWIS can be reached on 571-272-1838. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LaKaisha Jackson/
Examiner, Art Unit 2838