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 .
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 7-8 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claims 7-8, it is unclear what is illustrated and described herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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, 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gotta (U.S. Patent No.6,886,647) in view of Jahshan (U.S. Pub No. 20150318772).
Regarding claims 1, 4, 7, 8 Gotta discloses an electric vehicle drive train (See col. 8, lines 10-25), comprising: a coil driver system (See col, lines 4, lines 10-24) operable to configure a set of coils or windings of an electric machine based at least in part on speed and torque demands (See col. 5, lines 6-20); at least one of: a power source control system (See col. 4, lines 54-67) operable to perform cell switching, implementing cell selection, active balancing, and/or a variable DC link voltage between a battery and the coil driver system; or a fuel cell system (See col. 4, lines 54-67) operable supply a variable DC link voltage between at least one fuel cell and the coil driver system. In an analogous art, Jahshan more specifically disclose a coil driver (0062) and traction electric motors (0005). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify the system of Gotta and Jahshan by having a traction motor and coil driver system
Regarding claim 2, Gotta discloses wherein the coil driver system is operable to configure the coils or windings of the electric machine as a power converter to at least one of: invert, rectify, boost voltage or reduce voltage (See col. 4, lines 10-24).
Regarding claim 3, Jahshan discloses a traction battery electrically coupled to the power source control system (See paragraph 0005, 0006).
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gotta (U.S. Patent No.6,886,647) in view of Jahshan (U.S. Pub No. 20150318772) and Cheng et al. (U.S. Pub No. 20230264605).
Regarding claims 5-6, Gott and Jahshan disclose all but Cheng et al. disclose wherein adjusting a DC link voltage includes: reconfiguring, by a controller of a power source or cell control system, a set of power source cells electrically coupled to provide a voltage to the DC voltage link; and wherein adjusting a DC link voltage includes: controlling a fuel cell system electrically coupled to provide a voltage to the DC voltage link (See abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify the system of Gotta and Jahshan with that of Cheng to have a DC voltage link since it would have achieved a desired result for improving the electric machine efficiency to improve the overall vehicle efficiency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Oyobe et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,008,888) disclose an electrical powered vehicle includes a secondary self-resonant coil, a secondary coil, a rectifier, and a power storage device. The secondary self-resonant coil is configured to be magnetically coupled with a primary self-resonant coil of a power feeding device by magnetic field resonance, and allow reception of high frequency power from the primary self-resonant coil. The secondary coil is configured to allow reception of electric power from the secondary self-resonant coil by electromagnetic induction. The rectifier rectifies the electric power received by the secondary coil. The power storage device stores the electric power rectified by the rectifier.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERTRUDE ARTHUR JEANGLAUDE whose telephone number is (571)272-6954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 7:30-8:00 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, Ramya P Burgess can be reached at 571-272-6011. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GERTRUDE ARTHUR JEANGLAUDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661