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 .
This non-final office action is responsive to Applicants' application filed on 05/06/24. Claims 1-23 are presented for examination and are pending for the reasons indicated herein below.
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 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 20180367027 A1)
Regarding claim 1. Chen teaches a power converter [fig 2], the power converter comprising: one or more switches [m1];
one or more electrical elements [L]; and a control apparatus [IC1, excluding m1/m2] for controlling the operation of the one or more switches, the control apparatus configured to simulate one or more electrical parameters of the one or more elements and determine switch settings of the one or more switches based upon the one or more simulated electrical parameters [abstract, see OVP]; wherein the control apparatus is exclusively implemented as electrical hardware [IC1 is shown to be hardware, the controller does not become software by virtue of executing instruction, controller remains an electrical apparatus].
Regarding claim 2. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 1, wherein the one or more simulated electrical parameters are at least one of a current, a voltage [output voltage], a power, an electric field or a magnetic field and the one or more electrical elements are at least one of an inductor [L], a capacitor, a resistor, a transistor, or a transformer.
Regarding claim 3. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 2, wherein the control apparatus utilizes one or more commands and one or more simulated electrical parameters to determine the one or more switch settings [ovp indirectly controls m1].
Regarding claim 4. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 3, wherein the control apparatus utilizes one or more sensed parameters [Vo] of the one or more electrical elements [right terminal of L] to simulate one or more other parameters [i.e. output of A] of the one or more electrical elements.
Regarding claim 6. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 3, wherein the one or more commands are derived from an output goal [commands are derived from output of L] of the for the power converter and one or more sensed parameters of the one or more elements [i.e. output voltage].
Regarding claim 7. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 1, wherein the electrical hardware utilizes hardware logic [see AND gate in figure 3] and memory devices [C1 can be interpreted as a memory device, since C1 can hold a charge].
Regarding claim 8. Chen teaches a power converter [fig 2], the power converter comprising: one or more switches [m1];
an inductive element [L] coupled to the one or more switches, wherein the activation and deactivation of the one or more switches is effective to control a current in the inductive element and achieve an output goal [Voutput] of the power converter;
and a control apparatus [IC1, excluding m1/m2] for controlling operation of the one or more switches, the control apparatus configured to simulate the current in the inductive element and determine the switch settings of the one or more switches based at least in part upon the simulated current [abstract, see OVP], wherein the control apparatus exclusively utilizes electrical hardware to simulate the current and determine switch settings [IC1 is shown to be hardware, the controller does not become software by virtue of executing instruction, controller remains an electrical apparatus].
Regarding claim 9. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 8, wherein the control apparatus utilizes a sensed voltage [FB] of the inductive element to simulate the current in the inductive element [see A in fig 4, ¶26].
Regarding claim 10. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 9, wherein the control apparatus utilizes a current command [output of B in fig 3] and the simulated current to determine switch settings and achieve an output goal [function of controller] of the power converter.
Regarding claim 11. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 8, wherein the power converter is configured as one of: a bidirectional non-isolated DC to DC converter [bidirectional is interpreted as the inductor current going in multiple directions, when M1 is ON current goals in one direction and when m2 ON current goals in a different direction], a bidirectional isolated DC to DC converter, and a bidirectional isolated DC to AC converter.
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.
Claims 5 and 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20180367027 A1) in view of Sheng et al. (US 20170170734 A1)
Regarding claim 5 and 15. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 1. However, Chen does not explicitly mention a circuit wherein the control apparatus is implemented in a field programmable gate array (FPGA) or application specific integrated circuit (ASIC).
Sheng teaches a circuit wherein the control apparatus is implemented in a field programmable gate array (FPGA) or application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) [¶106]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the features of Sheng in order to provide a circuit optimize for integrating millions of transistors into a single chip, reducing size and improving the reliability.
Claims 12-14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 20180367027 A1) in view of Fornage (US 20140169055 A1)
Regarding claim 12. Chen teaches the power converter of claim 8. However, Chen does not explicitly mention wherein the power converter is one of a plurality of DC to AC converters and the plurality of DC to AC converters are deployed in a split phase or a 3-phase configuration.
Fornage teaches a circuit wherein the power converter is one of a plurality of DC to AC converters and the plurality of DC to AC converters are deployed in a split phase or a 3-phase configuration [120 fig 1]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the features of Fornage in order to provide a circuit to power the DCAC converter.
Regarding claim 13. Chen as modified teaches the power converter of claim 12, wherein an AC port of the power converter [i.e. 120] is connected in series or parallel with at least one other power converter [see 115 series with 120 Fornage].
Regarding claim 14. Chen as modified teaches the power converter of claim 12, wherein a DC port [port of 145 Fornage] of the power converter is connected in series or parallel with at least one other power converter [see 115 parallel with 120 Fornage].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-23 are allowed.
Regarding claim 16. Kama teaches a power converter [fig 2], the power converter comprising: a DC port and an AC port [see 1 and 6]; a full-bridge inverter [3] comprising a plurality of individually controlled switches with the parallel connection points of the full-bridge inverter switches coupled to the DC port; a transformer [6] with a first winding and second winding, wherein the first winding is coupled to the series connection points of the full bridge inverter.
The following is an examiner' s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art does not disclose or suggest, in combination with the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, primarily, “…at least one individually controlled switch coupled to a first terminal of the second winding of the transformer and a first terminal of the AC port; at least one individually controlled switch coupled to the second terminal of the second winding of the transformer and a second terminal of the AC port; wherein activation and deactivation of the plurality of individually controllable switches is effective to control a magnetizing inductance of the transformer and achieve an output goal of the power converter; a control apparatus that is configured to control operation of the plurality of individually controllable switches, the control apparatus also configured to simulate the current in the magnetizing inductance of the transformer and determine switch settings of the plurality of individually controllable switches based at least in part upon the simulated current, wherein the control apparatus exclusively utilizes electronic hardware components to determine the simulated current and switch settings..”
Examiner Note
The examiner cites particular columns and lines numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bryan Perez whose telephone number is (571)272-8837. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Fri. (7:30 – 5:00).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Crystal Hammond, can be reached on (571) 270-1682. 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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/BRYAN R PEREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2838