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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract use legal phraseology as “means”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the empty boxes (e.g. 10-22, 100 and 140) in figures 3A, 3B, 4A and 4B should contain symbols or text indicating their functionality. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “the input capacitor” (presented in claim 8) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 17 recites “an input voltage node”, which should be --the input voltage node -- because this term was previously presented in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 4, lines 1-2 recites “the power converter”, which should be – the inductor-less power converter -- because this way was previously presented this term in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 5 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 5 and 6, first line recites “the converter”, which should be – the inductor-less power converter -- because this way was previously presented this term in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6, line 4 recites “an input voltage, an output voltage, and a ground”, which should be -- the input voltage, the output voltage, and the ground -- because this term was previously presented in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 7, lines 1-2 recites “a post-stage”, which should be --the post-stage -- because this term was previously presented in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 8, lines 1-2 recites “a pre-stage”, which should be --the pre-stage – because in this term was previously presented in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 9, first line recites “the converter”, which should be – the inductor-less power converter -- because in this way was previously presented this term in the claim; Claim 9, second line recites “an input voltage to an output voltage”, which should be -- the input voltage to the output voltage -- because these terms were previously presented in the claim
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 10, first line recites “the converter”, which should be – the inductor-less power converter -- because in this way was previously presented this term in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 12, lines 1-2 recites “the power converter”, which should be – the inductor-less power converter -- because this way was previously presented this term in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 13, first line recites “the converter”, which should be – the inductor-less power converter -- because this way was previously presented this term in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 14, line 4 recites “an input voltage, an output voltage, and a ground”, which should be -- the input voltage, the output voltage, and the ground -- because this term was previously presented in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 15, lines 1-2 recites “a post-stage”, which should be --the post-stage -- because this term was previously presented in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 16, first line recites “the converter”, which should be – the inductor-less power converter -- because in this way was previously presented this term in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 16, first line recites “an inductor-less power converter”, which should be – the inductor-less power converter-- because this term was previously presented in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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 1-3, 5-7, 11 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Makowski (EP 3145069).
Regarding claim 1, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) an inductor-less power converter (figure 3, part UK) for converting an input voltage (figure 3, part input voltage at to) to an output voltage (figure 3, part output voltage at tn+1) at a conversion ratio (figure 3, part conversion ratio M at UK), comprising: a plurality of stages (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn), each stage (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn) comprising a capacitor (figure 3, parts C1-Cn), switching means (figure 3, parts KL) and a node (figure 3, parts node at lower terminal of C1-Cn), the capacitor (figure 3, parts C1-Cn) being configured as a switched capacitor (figure 3, parts C1-Cn), wherein the switching means (figure 3, parts KL) is configured for switching (figure 3, parts KL; at a/a’) the stage (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn) and connecting the capacitor (figure 3, parts C1-Cn), and the node (figure 3, parts node at lower terminal of C1-Cn) is configured to connect (figure 3, parts KL; at c) one of an input voltage, output voltage or ground to the node (figure 3, parts connect input voltage, output voltage or ground from t1-tn to the node at lower terminal of C1-Cn) (paragraph [0026]; the canonical circuit UK there are extracted equivalent terminals tt={t0 - t4 } having the ability to connect to the output, input and ground, wherein each of these 5 equivalent terminals tt={t0 - t4 } is connected to a respective switch of the 5 switches contained in the Single-Pole Triple-Throw switch SPTT, accompanied by the capacitor constituting the output of the circuit Cout); wherein the inductor-less power converter (figure 3, part UK) is a reconfigurable power converter (figure 3, part UK) comprising at least four stages (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn; n = at least four); wherein each of the stages (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn) comprises an input voltage node (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn; input voltage node), an output voltage node (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn; output voltage node) and a ground node (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn; ground node); wherein the switching means (figure 3, parts KL) is configured to connect a respective stage (figure 3, part respective stage of MT1-MTn) to one of the input voltage node (figure 3, part one of stages MT1-MTn; input voltage node at t0-tn), output voltage node (figure 3, part one of stages MT1-MTn; output voltage node at to-tn) and ground node (figure 3, part one of stages MT1-MTn; ground node at to-tn) for obtaining a plurality of different configurations (figure 3, part UK) (paragraph [0026]; the canonical circuit UK there are extracted equivalent terminals tt={t0 - t4 } having the ability to connect to the output, input and ground, wherein each of these 5 equivalent terminals tt={t0 - t4 } is connected to a respective switch of the 5 switches contained in the Single-Pole Triple-Throw switch SPTT, accompanied by the capacitor constituting the output of the circuit Cout), and providing a plurality of different conversion ratios (figure 3, part conversion ratio M at UK) for converting (figure 3, part UK) the input voltage (figure 3, part input voltage at to) to the output voltage (figure 3, part output voltage at tn+1); and a pre-stage (figure 3, part pre-stage generated by first KL connected to the node to at first a/a’) and a post-stage (figure 3, part post-stage generated by MK), each of the pre-stage (figure 3, part pre-stage generated by first KL connected to the node to at first a/a’) and post-stage (figure 3, part post-stage generated by MK) comprising switching means (figure 3, parts KL) configured to connect one of an input voltage node (figure 3, part input voltage node at t0-tn+1), output voltage node (figure 3, part output voltage node at t0-tn+1) and ground node (figure 3, part ground node at t0-tn+1), wherein the switching means (figure 3, parts KL) of the pre-stage (figure 3, part pre-stage generated by first KL connected to the node to at first a/a’) replaces the switching means (figure 3, parts KL) for a first stage of the plurality of stages (figure 3, part MT1) (paragraphs [0026]-[0027]; As shown in Figs. 2 and 4 , the circuit for canonical and adiabatic conversion of DC voltage comprises a canonical circuit UK with n transfer modules MT1, MT2, MT3 connected to each other in a cascaded way Fib, each of which is constructed of a single electric capacitor C1, C2, C3, and three electronic switches KL… All terminals of the set tt={t0 - t4 } are assigned with numerical weights constituting the setww = {w (t 0 )- w (t 4 ), ...} and the switching of terminals tt={t0 - t4 } contained in between the input Vin and the output Vout and ground in the terminal switch… Each realizable voltage conversion ratio M).
Regarding claim 2, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) the switching means (figure 3, parts KL) of each of the stages (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn) comprise a single-pole-single-throw switch (figure 3, parts KL) to connect the respective stage to one of the input voltage node (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn; input voltage node), output voltage node (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn; output voltage node) and ground node (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn; ground node) (paragraph [0024]; a Single-Pole Single-Throw (SPST) switch to select the operating mode of the converter).
Regarding claim 3, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) a controller (figure 3, parts controller that control KL) configured to control the switching means (figure 3, parts KL) of each of the stages (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn), wherein the controller (figure 3, parts controller that control KL) is arranged for at least (k-1) phases (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn).
Regarding claim 5, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) the converter (figure 3, part UK) is arranged for a Direct Current (DC) input voltage (figures 3 and 4, part input voltage Vin at to).
Regarding claim 6, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) the converter (figure 3, part UK) is arranged for a plurality of different configurations (figure 3, part plurality of different configurations of UK based on operation of the switches KL), providing 3k conversion ratios (figure 3, part conversion ratio M at UK), wherein k is a number of sets of switching means (figure 3, parts KL) comprising the switching means (figure 3, parts KL) of each of the stage (figure 3, part plurality of stages MT1-MTn) and an input voltage (figure 3, part input voltage at t0-tn+1), an output voltage (figure 3, part output voltage at t0-tn+1), and a ground (figure 3, part ground at t0-tn+1), for converting the input voltage (figure 3, part input voltage at to) to the output voltage (figure 3, part output voltage at tn+1) (paragraphs [0026]-[0027]; As shown in Figs. 2 and 4 , the circuit for canonical and adiabatic conversion of DC voltage comprises a canonical circuit UK with n transfer modules MT1, MT2, MT3 connected to each other in a cascaded way Fib, each of which is constructed of a single electric capacitor C1, C2, C3, and three electronic switches KL… All terminals of the set tt={t0 - t4 } are assigned with numerical weights constituting the setww = {w (t 0 )- w (t 4 ), ...} and the switching of terminals tt={t0 - t4 } contained in between the input Vin and the output Vout and ground in the terminal switch… Each realizable voltage conversion ratio M).
Regarding claim 7, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) a post-stage (figure 3, part post-stage generated by MK) comprising an output capacitor (figure 4, part Cout) connected in parallel with a node (figure 4, part node at t4) of the post-stage (figure 3, part post-stage generated by MK).
Regarding claim 11, claim 3 has the same limitations, based on this is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 13, claim 5 has the same limitations, based on this is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 14, claim 6 has the same limitations, based on this is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 15, claim 7 has the same limitations, based on this is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 16, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 6). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) the converter (figure 3, part UK) is arranged for a plurality of different configurations (figure 3, part plurality of different configurations of UK based on operation of the switches KL) providing a step-up conversion ratio of a maximum of 1:2^(k-2) (figure 3, part step-up conversion ratio at UK) and a step-down conversion ratio of a minimum of 2^(k-2):1 (figure 3, part step-down conversion ratio at UK) (paragraph [0022]; the circuit can be easily programmed to achieve any gain (discrete/step programming of the output voltage at the maximum theoretically achievable precision)).
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 8-10, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makowski (EP 3145069), in view of Xiao et al. (Z. Xiao et al., "On-chip reconfigurable switched-capacitor DC-DC converter for indoor PV energy harvesting", ELECTRONICS LETTERS, THE INSTITUTION OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, 19 January 2017 (2017-01-19), page 108-110.), hereinafter Xiao.
Regarding claim 8, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) a pre-stage (figure 3, part pre-stage generated by first KL connected to the node to at first a/a’) that comprises a node of the pre-stage (figure 3, part node to at pre-stage generated by first KL connected to the node to at first a/a’). However, Makowski does not expressly disclose an input capacitor connected in parallel.
Xiao teaches (see figures 1-5) a pre-stage (figure 2[a], part pre-stage generated by S2 connected to Vpv) that comprises an input capacitor (figure 1[a] and 2[a], part input capacitor Cpv connected to Vpv) connected in parallel with a node of the pre-stage (figure 2[a], part node at Vpv of the pre-stage generated by S2 connected to Vpv).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the input capacitor features as taught by Xiao to the pre-stage of Makowski and obtain a pre-stage that comprises an input capacitor connected in parallel with a node of the pre-stage, because it provides more stable operation in order to improve the overall energy efficiency of the converter (page 108; left column; Introduction; fourth sentence).
Regarding claim 9, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) the converter (figure 3, part UK) is configured to convert (figure 3, part UK) an input voltage (figure 3, part input voltage at to) to an output voltage (figure 3, part output voltage at tn+1). However, Makowski does not expressly disclose a power range between 10 μWatt and 100 mWatt.
Xiao teaches (see figures 1-5) the converter (figure 2[a], part converter) is configured to convert an input voltage (figure 2[a], part input voltage from VPV at left input of S2) to an output voltage (figure 2[a], part output voltage to Vload at right output of S33) in a power range between 10 μWatt and 100 mWatt (figure 5, part output power) (page 109; right column first paragraph; the 2/3-topology delivers 26 μW of power to the load with peak efficiency of 87% at 100 kHz switching frequency. The 4/3-topology is designed to operate at the same switching frequency as the 2/3-topology, 88% peak efficiency is achieved while delivering 50 μW of power from the PV cell to the energy buffer. The 3/5-converter-topology is designed with switching frequency of 300 kHz, at which the converter achieves a peak efficiency of 78% while delivering 32 μW of power from the energy buffer to the load).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to configure the converter of Makowski with the conversion features as taught Xiao and obtain the converter is configured to convert an input voltage to an output voltage in a power range between 10 μWatt and 100 mWatt, because it improves the overall energy efficiency of the converter (page 108; left column; Introduction; fourth sentence).
Regarding claim 10, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) the converter (figure 3, part UK). However, Makowski does not expressly disclose arranged for powering at least one device or module selected from the group consisting of: a sensor module, a loT device, a USB device, and a Bluetooth module.
Xiao teaches (see figures 1-5) the converter (figure 2[a], part converter) is arranged for powering at least one device or module (figure 1[a] and 2[a], part load at Vload) selected from the group consisting of: a sensor module, a loT device, a USB device, and a Bluetooth module (page 108; left column; Introduction; first sentence; Energy harvesting is a promising solution for powering miniaturised wireless sensor nodes that consume ultra-low power).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to apply the converter of Makowski to the load features as taught Xiao and obtain the converter is arranged for powering at least one device or module selected from the group consisting of: a sensor module, a loT device, a USB device, and a Bluetooth module, because the combination result in more efficient power converter for this type of load (page 108; left column; Introduction; fourth sentence).
Regarding claim 17, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) an inductor-less power converter (figure 3, part UK). However, Makowski does no expressly disclose an energy harvester arrangement comprising: an energy harvesting module for harvesting incident energy, and providing the harvested energy as an input voltage to the energy harvester arrangement.
Xiao teaches (see figures 1-5) an energy harvester arrangement (figure 1[a]) (page 108; left column; System architecture and converter implementation; The architecture of the energy harvesting system is shown in Fig. 1a) comprising: an energy harvesting module (figure 1[a], part PV energy harvesting cell) for harvesting incident energy (figure 1[a], part PV energy harvesting cell), and providing the harvested energy as an input voltage (figure 1[a], part Vpv from PV energy harvesting cell) to the energy harvester arrangement (figure 1[a]); an inductor-less power converter (figures 1[a] and 2[a], part reconfigurable SC converter).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to apply the converter of Makowski to the energy harvester arrangement features as taught Xiao and obtain an energy harvester arrangement comprising: an energy harvesting module for harvesting incident energy, and providing the harvested energy as an input voltage to the energy harvester arrangement; an inductor-less power converter, because the combination result in more efficient power converter for this type of energy harvester arrangement (page 108; left column; Introduction; fourth sentence).
Regarding claim 18, Makowski and Xiao teach everything claimed as applied above (see claim 17). However, Makowski does no expressly disclose the energy harvester arrangement, wherein the arrangement further comprises: a maximum power point tracking module.
Xiao teaches (see figures 1-5) the energy harvester arrangement (figure 1[a]), wherein the arrangement further (figure 1[a]) comprises: a maximum power point tracking module (figure 1[a], part maximum power point tracking module generated by at hysteresis controller) (page 108; left and right columns; System architecture and converter implementation; a hysteresis controller regulates both the PV cell voltage VPV and the load voltage VLoad to ensure maximum power extraction and supply the desired voltage to the load. Fig. 1b illustrates the operating waveforms. The PV voltage regulation is implemented by adaptively comparing VPV with VMPP (the voltage corresponding to maximum power extraction) and VMPP − DVMPP, where DVMPP defines the size of the hysteresis band).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to apply the converter of Makowski to the energy harvester arrangement features as taught Xiao and obtain the energy harvester arrangement, wherein the arrangement further comprises: a maximum power point tracking module, because the combination result in more efficient power converter for this type of energy harvester arrangement (page 108; left column; Introduction; fourth sentence).
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makowski (EP 3145069), in view of Shao et al. (US 2022/0337078), hereinafter Shao.
Regarding claim 4, Makowski discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). Further, Makowski discloses (see figures 1-9) the power converter (figure 3, part UK). However, Makowski does no expressly disclose arranged for bi-directional power conversion.
Shao teaches (see figures 1-10) the power converter (figure 6, part 330) is arranged for bi-directional power conversion (figure 6, part 330) (paragraph [0056]; The inventors of the present disclosure have appreciated that a switched capacitor conversion circuit may be used bidirectionally to step up voltage by a certain factor in charge mode and step down a voltage from the battery by the same factor in discharge mode).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to configure the converter of Makowski with the bi-directional power conversion features as taught by Shao and obtain the power converter is arranged for bi-directional power conversion, because provides more versatile and efficient power converter (paragraph [0058]).
Regarding claim 12, claim 4 has the same limitations, based on this is rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Carlos O. Rivera-Pérez, whose telephone number is (571) 272-2432 and fax is (571) 273-2432. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday, 8:30 AM – 5:00 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thienvu V. Tran can be reached on (571) 270-1276. 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.
/C.O.R. /
Examiner, Art Unit 2838
/THIENVU V TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2838