DETAILED ACTION
1. 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 § 102
2. 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.
3. Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 9, 11, 12, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yeh et al. (2015/0177805) (hereinafter “Yeh”).
Regarding claim 1, Yeh discloses a power management method adaptable for a power supply device (Fig.1, please refer to the whole reference for detailed), comprising: in a backup mode (mode when a first power supply and a second power supply are used; please refer to example shown in the table in ¶ 26), making a first power supply (for example - 10b in Fig.1) that is a master power supply to receive a power setting value (700 W of power set by a user as stated in ¶ 41 and the table shown in ¶ 26) and limiting a first output power value (output power value from 10b) of the master power supply to not be greater than the power setting value (in this case: 700 W power); and in the backup mode, making a second power supply (for example - 10a in Fig.1) that is a slave power supply (please refer to the table shown in ¶ 26 for setting either master or slave) to be activated, and controlling an output power of the slave power supply to be a second output power value (in this case: 300 W power as stated in ¶ 41), wherein the second output power value (300 W) is set according to a difference between a total load of the power supply device (1000 W as stated in ¶ 41) and the first output power value (700 W).
Regarding claim 3, Yeh discloses adjusting the first output power value (output power value from 10b; 700W) of the master power supply (for example 10b) by adjusting an output voltage (Vbo2 in Fig.1) of the master power supply (due to feedback loop control provided by 121b - based on the power formula: P = VI, any adjustment of the first output power value is based on adjusting of voltage (sensed by Vbo2) and/or current (sensed by current sensor of 10b (Isense)) output by the master power supply (10b)).
Regarding claim 5, Yeh discloses in a normal mode, making both the first output power value of the master power supply and the second output power value of the slave power supply to be half of the total load of the power supply device (please refer to at least the table shown in ¶ 26, where the power supplies 10a and 10b respectively provide the average power 50%).
Regarding claim 6, Yeh discloses switching the first power supply to be the slave power supply, and switching the second power supply to be the master power supply (please refer to at least the table shown in ¶ 26, where the master mode or the slave mode for power supplies 10a and 10b are switchable).
Regarding claim 7, Yeh discloses a server system (Fig.1, please refer to the whole reference for detailed), comprising: a load device (at least 30); and a power supply device (10a and 10b) coupled to the load device, and comprising: a first power supply (for example – 10a in Fig.1) set as a master power supply (please refer to the table shown in ¶ 26 and 41); and a second power supply (for example 10b) set as a slave power supply (please refer to the table shown in ¶ 26 and 41) and coupled in parallel with the first power supply (Fig.1), wherein, in a backup mode, the load device provides a power setting value (for example - 300 W set by a user as stated in ¶ 41) to the master power supply (10a), a first output power value provided by the master power supply (300 W) is not greater than the power setting value (300 W), the load device sets a second output power value (700 W provided by 10b; ¶ 41) provided by the power supply device according to a difference between a total load of the power supply device (1000 W) and the first output power value (300 W; ¶ 41).
Regarding claim 9, Yeh discloses the master power supply (10a) adjusts a generated internal output voltage (Vao1 or Vao2 in Fig.1) to adjust the first output power value provided by the master power supply (please refer to at least ¶ 19 and 41).
Regarding claim 11, Yeh discloses in a normal mode, both the first output power value of the master power supply and the second output power value of the slave power supply to be half of the total load of the power supply device (please refer to at least the table shown in ¶ 26, where the power supplies 10a and 10b respectively provide the average power 50%).
Regarding claim 12, Yeh discloses the load device (at least 30) sends a command to switch the first power supply to be the slave power supply, and switch the second power supply to be the master power supply (please refer to the table shown in ¶ 26 for switching the master and slave).
Regarding claim 17, Yeh discloses the load device (at least 30) comprises: a baseboard management controller (controller of 30) providing the power setting value (300 W) and the second output power value (700 W).
Regarding claim 18, Yeh discloses a power supply device (Fig.1, please refer to the whole reference for detailed), comprising: a first power supply (for example - 10b in Fig.1) set as a master power supply (please refer to the table shown in ¶ 26 and 41); and a second power supply (10a) set as a slave power supply (please refer to the table shown in ¶ 26 and 41) and coupled in parallel with the first power supply (Fig.1), wherein in a backup mode, the master power supply receives a power setting value (700 W of power set by a user as stated in ¶ 41 and the table shown in ¶ 26), a first output power value (output power value from 10b) of the master power supply is limited to be no greater than the power setting value (700 W), and an output power of the slave power supply (10a) is a second output power value (300 W), wherein the second output power value (300 W) is set according to a difference between a total load of the power supply device (1000 W) and the first output power value (700 W; ¶ 41).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
6. Claims 2, 8 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh et al. (2015/0177805) (hereinafter “Yeh”) in view of Togare (2010/0264741) and Freeman et al. (2010/0164292) (“Freeman”).
Regarding claim 2, Yeh is used to reject claim 1 above.
Yeh doesn’t explicitly disclose when the power setting value is greater than the total load, making the slave power supply to be turned off.
Togare discloses an example of when a power setting value (power setting value of 100A in Fig.1A, which is rated power output of 100A) is greater than the total load (system load λ in Fig.1A), making the slave power supply (for example - 100N in Fig.1A) to be turned off (also please refer to information related to Figs.1A and 4-7).
Freeman also discloses another example of when a power setting value (a predetermined power threshold in 602 of Fig.6) is greater than the total load (load in 602 of Fig.6), making the slave power supply (at least one redundant power supply as stated in 604 of Fig.6) to be turned off.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yeh with the teaching of Togare and/or Freeman to provide when the power setting value is greater than the total load, making the slave power supply to be turned off. The suggestion/motivation would have been to efficiently provide power and/or reduce power consumption by turning off unnecessary power supply/power supplies.
Regarding claim 8, Yeh is used to reject claim 7 above.
Yeh doesn’t explicitly disclose when the power setting value is greater than the total load, the slave power supply to be turned off.
Togare discloses an example of when a power setting value (power setting value of 100A in Fig.1A, which is rated power output of 100A) is greater than the total load (system load λ in Fig.1A), the slave power supply (for example - 100N in Fig.1A) to be turned off (also please refer to information related to Figs.1A and 4-7).
Freeman also discloses another example of when a power setting value (a predetermined power threshold in 602 of Fig.6) is greater than the total load (load in 602 of Fig.6), the slave power supply (at least one redundant power supply as stated in 604 of Fig.6) to be turned off.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yeh with the teaching of Togare and/or Freeman to provide when the power setting value is greater than the total load, the slave power supply to be turned off. The suggestion/motivation would have been to efficiently provide power and/or reduce power consumption by turning off unnecessary power supply/power supplies.
Regarding claim 24, Yeh is used to reject claim 18 above.
Yeh discloses in a normal mode, the first output power value of the master power supply and the second output power value of the slave power supply are both half of the total load of the power supply device (please refer to at least the table shown in ¶ 26, where the power supplies 10a and 10b respectively provide the average power 50%).
Yeh doesn’t explicitly disclose when the power setting value is greater than the total load, the slave power supply is turned off; wherein when the master power supply fails, the second output power value generated by the slave power supply is boosted to be equal to the total load of the power supply device.
Togare discloses an example of when a power setting value (power setting value of 100A in Fig.1A, which is rated power output of 100A) is greater than the total load (system load λ in Fig.1A), the slave power supply (for example - 100N in Fig.1A) to be turned off (also please refer to information related to Figs.1A and 4-7).
Freeman discloses when the master power supply fails (for example 102a In Fig.1 or 4), the second output power value generated by the slave power supply (for example 102b) is boosted to be equal to the total load of the power supply device (please refer to at least ¶ 3, 6, 11, 19, 22, 45, 48 and 49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yeh with the teaching of Togare to provide when the power setting value is greater than the total load, the slave power supply is turned off; and with the teaching of Freeman to provide when the master power supply fails, the second output power value generated by the slave power supply is boosted to be equal to the total load of the power supply device. The suggestion/motivation would have been to efficiently provide power and/or reduce power consumption by turning off unnecessary power supply/power supplies.
7. Claims 4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeh et al. (2015/0177805) (hereinafter “Yeh”) in view of Freeman et al. (2010/0164292) (“Freeman”).
Regarding claim 4, Yeh is used to reject claim 1 above.
Yeh doesn’t explicitly disclose when the master power supply fails, boosting the second output power value of the slave power supply to be equal to the total load of the power supply device.
Freeman discloses when the master power supply fails (for example 102a In Fig.1 or 4), boosting the second output power value of the slave power supply (for example 102b) to be equal to the total load of the power supply device (please refer to at least ¶ 3, 6, 11, 19, 22, 45, 48 and 49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yeh with the teaching of Freeman to provide when the master power supply fails, boosting the second output power value of the slave power supply to be equal to the total load of the power supply device. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use multiple redundant power supplies to provide redundancy protection as taught by Freeman’s ¶ 47.
Regarding claim 10, Yeh is used to reject claim 8 above.
Yeh doesn’t explicitly disclose when the master power supply fails, the master power supply sends a fault signal to the load device, and the load device boosts the second output power value of the slave power supply to be equal to the total load of the power supply device according to the fault signal.
Freeman discloses when the master power supply fails (for example 102a In Fig.1, 4 and 5), the master power supply sends a fault signal (signal from 202 in Fig.3 indicating measured power at an output of the power supply (which would be able to detect the power supply is failed or not; ¶ 58) to the load device (112(s) and 106), and the load device boosts the second output power value of the slave power supply (for example 102b) to be equal to the total load of the power supply device according to the fault signal (please refer to at least ¶ 3, 6, 11, 19, 22, 45, 48 and 49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yeh with the teaching of Freeman to provide when the master power supply fails, the master power supply sends a fault signal to the load device, and the load device boosts the second output power value of the slave power supply to be equal to the total load of the power supply device according to the fault signal. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use multiple redundant power supplies to provide redundancy protection as taught by Freeman’s ¶ 47.
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 13-16 and 19-23 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD TAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7455. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached on 571-270-3684. 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.
/Richard Tan/Primary Examiner 2849