DETAILED ACTION
The instant action is in response to application 9 May 2024.
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
The specification is objected to for the following informalities:
The title does not appear to be descriptive. Examiner suggests “Reactive Power Minimization in a Dual Active Bridge Converter”.
There appears to be a PCT filing that was filed after the American document. Though not required since the US filing has the earliest date, it is ordinary and customary to include the filing dates and publication dates (if available) of other copending applications.
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for priority to 9 May 2024.
Drawings
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 voltages measured across the switches must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Figure 30 is objected to for minor informalities: The graphs are not distinguishable, since they appear to use the same embarkation. Please use different line for each shown mode.
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 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 9, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
As to claim 9, applicant claims “wherein the iteratively controlling or adjusting the modulation control attributes comprises adjusting the modulation control attributes based on voltages measured across one or more switches of the converter.” One of ordinary skill would typically regard this as a Vce of a BJT of a Vds of a mosfet. However, no items that measure VDS are shown in applicant’s figures. Though applicant does show a voltage graph of various switches in Fig. 24 and other places, a sensor to generate that voltage is not shown, nor is an algorithm that readily uses them shown in the figures. Applicant is cordially reminded that all claimed subject matter must be shown. For the purposes of examination, “the voltage across one or more switches” shall be interpreted as the input voltage and output voltage, since that would be the voltage across at least two switches and is suggested by a number of applicants figures.
As to claim 19, there is a similar issue to claim 9 above.
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.
For method claims, note that under MPEP 2112.02, the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore the previous rejections based on the apparatus will not be repeated. (The claims have been condensed.)
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.
Claim(s) 1, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Bingin (CN 116169754), provided on applicant’s IDS.
As to claim 1, Bingin teaches A system for controlling a converter (the invention relates to a control method and device of a dual-active bridge converter; English Machine Translation: abstract), the system comprising: a converter configured to distribute electric energy from an energy source to a load, the converter comprising a dual active bridge (DAB) (controlling the dual active bridge converter to charge the battery with 3 constant current; English Machine Translation: [0013]); and a controller system comprising: one or more interfaces configured to communicate with the converter; and a controller, the controller system further comprising: one or more hardware processors; and memory storing computer instructions, the computer instructions (interface communicates with computer which in turn communicates with the converter via digital communication; English Machine Translation: [0143]) when executed by the one or more hardware processors configured to perform: determining modulation control attributes based on characteristics of the converter (the phase shift angle is used to control the sequential action of switches in a dual active bridge converter based on a single phase shift modulation (phase shift angle is 8 modulation control parameter, control of sequential switching is a modulation control attribute comprising control parameters and modes; English Machine Translation: [0016]), the modulation control attributes comprising one or more modulation control parameters and one or more modulation control modes corresponding to one or more phase shift techniques; obtaining operational condition information within the converter, the operational condition information corresponding to a component within the converter or an output of the converter (the constant power control module is used for controlling the double-active-bridge converter to perform constant power charging on the battery according to the reference power if the output power of the double-active-bridge converter reaches a preset power threshold (power threshold is operational condition information; English Machine Translation: [0027]); iteratively adjusting the modulation control attributes based on the operational condition information; and controlling the converter based on the iteratively adjusted modulation control attributes (charging parameters updated at different thresholds and is thus iteratively adjusted, control of the converter is based on these updated thresholds; English Machine Translation: [0074]).
As to claim 11, this is a method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims above and is anticipated per MPEP 2112.02.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 10, 11 12, 13, 14, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Chan (US 20220337166).
As to claim 1, Chan discloses a system for controlling a converter, the system comprising:a converter configured to distribute electric energy from an energy source to a load, the converter comprising a dual active bridge (DAB); and a controller system comprising: one or more interfaces configured to communicate with the converter; and a controller, the controller system further comprising: one or more hardware processors (152, 162); and memory storing computer instructions (¶65 “In FIG. 6A, preset constants are obtained, step 502, such as by reading a memory device or register,”), the computer instructions when executed by the one or more hardware processors configured to perform: determining modulation control attributes based on characteristics of the converter, the modulation control attributes comprising one or more modulation control parameters (See Figs. 6A-6C, which control the modulation based upon the link voltage, the battery voltage, and the battery current) and one or more modulation control modes corresponding to one or more phase shift techniques (phase shift modulation/PSM); obtaining operational condition information within the converter, the operational condition information corresponding to a component within the converter or an output of the converter (it corresponds to the output of the converter); iteratively adjusting the modulation control attributes based on the operational condition information (it changes conditions dependent upon the flow charts shown in 6A-6C); and controlling the converter based on the iteratively adjusted modulation control attributes (552, 554).
PNG
media_image1.png
452
805
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 2, Chan teaches wherein the controlling of the converter comprises generating one or more modulation waveforms according to the iteratively adjusted modulation control attributes, the one or more modulation waveforms being implemented as full bridge output alternating current (AC) waveforms on primary and secondary bridges of the converter (the primary side outputs a sinusoid when charging the battery).
As to claim 3, Chan teaches wherein the converter comprises a primary bridge and a secondary bridge; and the modulation control attributes comprise any of a phase shift between an output voltage of the primary bridge and an output voltage of the secondary bridge (Phase Shift Modulation is shown above and taught in the specification), a duty cycle of the primary bridge, and a duty cycle of the secondary bridge.
As to claim 4, Chan teaches wherein the generating of the one or more waveforms comprises generating a primary waveform and a secondary waveform, the primary waveform at least partially overlapping with the secondary waveform (Fig. 9, Vp, Vs).
As to claim 9, Chan teaches wherein the iteratively controlling or adjusting the modulation control attributes comprises adjusting the modulation control attributes based on voltages measured across one or more switches (the control algorithm bases it upon the output and input voltage, which is the voltage across at least a pair of switches of the DAB of the converter.
As to claim 10, Chan teaches wherein the iteratively controlling or adjusting the modulation control attributes comprises adjusting the modulation control attributes based on a power level of the converter (he teaches a constant power mode).
As to claims 11, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, these are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims above and are anticipated per MPEP 2112.02.
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, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chan (US 20220337166) in view of Ben-Yaakov (US 11370308).
As to claim 5, Chan does not disclose wherein the iteratively controlling or adjusting of the modulation control attributes comprises adjusting a threshold reactive current level within the converter based on the temperature or a change in the temperature (See Fig. 3A & Col. 9, lines 15-20 “. Conditions of the power units 102 include an age of each power unit 102, a temperature of each power unit 102, and/or other conditions. In some examples, the power unit monitoring system 260 can compare conditions of each power unit 102 to limits such as temperature limits, in order to prevent violation of the limits.” He is disabling the converter when the temperature runs too high, which adjusts the current to zero).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device above to use temperature protection as disclosed in Ben-Yaakov to prevent overheating.
As to claim 15, this is a method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims above and is made obvious per MPEP 2112.02.
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chan (US 20220337166) in view of Ben-Yaakov (US 11370308) and Harrye et als “Reactive Power Minimization with Dual Active Bridge DC/DC Converter with Triple Phase Shift control using Neural Network”.
As to claim 6, Chan in view of Ben-Yaakov does not explciitly teach wherein the iteratively controlling or adjusting of the modulation control attributes comprises adjusting a modulation control mode of the converter based on a comparison between an amount of reactive current within the converter and the threshold reactive current level.
Harrve teaches wherein the iteratively controlling (Fig. 4) or adjusting of the modulation control attributes comprises adjusting a modulation control mode of the converter based on a comparison between an amount of reactive current within the converter and the threshold reactive current level (it adjusts until there is a calculated minimum of reactive power).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device above to use reactive power minimization as disclosed in Harrve to decrease the overall losses in the system.
As to claim 16, this is a method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims above and is made obvious per MPEP 2112.02.
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chan (US 20220337166).
As to claim 8, Chan does not explicitly teach wherein the converter operates under approximately unity voltage gain. He odes make this obvous. it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
As to claim 15, this is a method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims above and is made obvious per MPEP 2112.02.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 17 would be allowable if rewritten 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:
As to claim 7, the prior art fails to disclose: “wherein the adjusting of the modulation control mode comprises: in response to the amount of reactive current within the converter failing to satisfy the threshold reactive current level, adjusting from a single-phase shift (SPS) mode to a triple phase shift (TPS) mode.” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant.
As to claim 17, the prior art fails to disclose: “wherein the adjusting of the modulation control mode comprises: in response to the amount of reactive current within the converter failing to satisfy the threshold reactive current level, adjusting from a single-phase shift (SPS) mode to a triple phase shift (TPS) mode.” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant.
Please note: while objected or allowed claims have been indicated, only the presented claims have been examined for compliance with form and 35 USC 112 consideration. As a reminder, claims that are dependent upon objected claims still require examination for form and 35 USC 112 issues even if they overcome 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections. Similarly, amendments incorporating allowable subject matter into independent claims requires reconsideration for dependent claim form and any possible 35 USC 112 issues that arise through amendments even if the 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections are overcome. As such, applicant is advised that while examiner can enter previously allowed claims or previously objected claims rewritten into independent form after final rejection, any other claims may not be entered.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular column, paragraph, 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 PETER M NOVAK whose telephone number is (571)270-1375. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM,Monday through Thursday, EST.
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, 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/PETER M NOVAK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2839