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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 2026-06-18 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in this application. Claim 1 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 2026-06-18, with respect to claims 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous 35 USC 102/103 rejection of claims 1-20 has been withdrawn.
However, a new grounds of rejection is being made, see below.
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.
Claim 19 is 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.
Claim 19 recites the phrase " the sensed electrical parameter" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of compact prosecution, the examiner will interpret “the sensed electrical parameter” to read as – the sensed voltage --.
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.
Claims 1, 4-6, 9, and 12-15, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerrero et al. (ES-2930209-A1 – Refer to machine translation attached in office action dated 2026-03-25 for references cited) in view of Weis (US-20200166558-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Guerrero teaches a mobile machine (page 3 para 3 teaches system can be used on an electric vehicle) configured for detecting a source of a ground fault, the mobile machine comprising:
a battery string including at least one battery cell (Fig 1: electrical energy storage device, 6);
an electrical bus coupled with the battery string (Fig 1: electrical conductors, 3a & 3b);
a first electrical converter (Fig 1: First AC-DC converter) and a second electrical converter (Fig 1: DC-DC converter, 1e), each of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter coupled with the electrical bus (can be seen in Fig 1),
a sensor configured for sensing an electrical parameter (Fig 2: voltage meter, 17);
a controller configured to receive the sensed electrical parameter (Fig 2: processing media, 20);
detecting, using the sensed electrical parameter, a switching frequency (Page 9 Para 3 teaches the detection of a switching frequency of a converter based on the measured voltage).
Guerrero does not explicitly teach, the first electrical converter configured for operating at a first switching frequency and the second electrical converter configured for operating at a second switching frequency, wherein the first switching frequency is different from the second switching frequency;
a sensor coupled with the electrical bus and configured for sensing an electrical parameter of the electrical bus; and
the controller configured to detect ground faults by:
detecting, using the sensed electrical parameter, at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency; and
identifying, based on the detected at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency, at least one of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter as the source of the ground fault.
However, Weis teaches the first electrical converter configured for operating at a first switching frequency and the second electrical converter configured for operating at a second switching frequency, wherein the first switching frequency is different from the second switching frequency (Para [0026] teaches the converters may have different switching frequencies);
a sensor coupled with the electrical bus and configured for sensing an electrical parameter of the electrical bus (Para [0040-0041] teaches sensing the voltage of the power transmission network, 5, therefore a sensor must exist to identify the voltage); and
a controller configured to receive the sensed electrical parameter (Para [0040-0041] teaches identifying based on the voltage sensed which converter is at fault, therefore a controller must exist to perform this action), the controller configured to detect ground faults by:
detecting, using the sensed electrical parameter, at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency (Para [0026] and Para [0041] teach detecting the switching frequencies on the converters); and
identifying, based on the detected at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency, at least one of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter as the source of the ground fault (Para [0026] and Para [0041] teach identifying which converter is at fault based on the switching frequency detected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the machine of Guerrero to include the fault identification of Weis. A motivation for this modification is identifying the fault location makes it possible to shut down the associated faulty converter as taught by Weis Para [0028].
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Guerrero and Weis, as presented with respect to claim 1, teaches analyzing a frequency content of the sensed electrical parameter to determine a presence of one or more of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency (Weis - Para [0026] and Para [0041] teach identifying which converter is at fault based on the switching frequency detected). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 5, Guerrero further teaches performing a Fourier transform on the sensed electrical parameter (Page 6 Para 1 teaches using a Fourier transform to estimate a value based on the measured value).
Regarding Claim 6, Guerrero further teaches wherein the first electrical converter includes at least one of a DC/DC converter and an AC/DC converter (Fig 1 shows an AC/DC converters, 1a and 1c, and DC/DC converters, 1e and 1f).
Regarding Claim 9, Guerrero teaches a method for detecting a source of a ground fault in a mobile machine, the method comprising:
operating a first electrical converter (Fig 1: First AC-DC converter);
operating a second electrical converter (Fig 1: DC-DC converter, 1e);
sensing an electrical parameter (Fig 2: voltage meter, 17, senses voltage);
receiving the sensed electrical parameter (Fig 2 shows a processing unit, 20, receiving signal from the voltage meter, 17);
detecting, using the sensed electrical parameter, a switching frequency (Page 9 Para 3 teaches the detection of a switching frequency of a converter based on the measured voltage);
Guerrero does not teach operating a first electrical converter at a first switching frequency;
operating a second electrical converter at a second switching frequency, wherein the first switching frequency is different from the second switching frequency;
sensing an electrical parameter of an electrical bus;
receiving the sensed electrical parameter;
detecting, using the sensed electrical parameter, at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency; and
identifying, based on the detected at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency, at least one of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter as the source of the ground fault.
However, Weis teaches operating a first electrical converter (Fig 1: converter, 9) at a first switching frequency;
operating a second electrical converter (Fig 1: converter, 10) at a second switching frequency, wherein the first switching frequency is different from the second switching frequency (Para [0026] teaches the converters may have different switching frequencies);
sensing an electrical parameter of an electrical bus (Para [0040-0041] teaches sensing the voltage of the power transmission network, 5, therefore a sensor must exist to identify the voltage);
receiving the sensed electrical parameter (Para [0040-0041] teaches identifying based on the voltage sensed which converter is at fault);
detecting, using the sensed electrical parameter, at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency (Para [0026] and Para [0041] teach detecting the switching frequencies on the converters); and
identifying, based on the detected at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency, at least one of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter as the source of the ground fault (Para [0026] and Para [0041] teach identifying which converter is at fault based on the switching frequency detected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Guerrero to include the fault identification of Weis. A motivation for this modification is identifying the fault location makes it possible to shut down the associated faulty converter as taught by Weis Para [0028].
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Guerrero and Weis, as presented with respect to claim 9, teaches analyzing a frequency content of the sensed electrical parameter to determine a presence of one or more of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency (Weis - Para [0026] and Para [0041] teach identifying which converter is at fault based on the switching frequency detected). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 13, Guerrero further teaches performing a Fourier transform on the sensed electrical parameter (Page 6 Para 1 teaches using a Fourier transform to estimate a value based on the measured value).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Guerrero and Weis, as presented with respect to claim 9, teaches operating the first electrical converter at the first switching frequency; and operating the second electrical converter at the second switching frequency (Weis - Para [0026] teaches the converters may have different switching frequencies). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Guerrero and Weis, as presented with respect to claim 9, teaches operating the first electrical converter at the first switching frequency; and operating the second electrical converter at the first switching frequency (Weis - Para [0026] teaches the converters may have identical switching frequencies). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Claims 16 and 18-19, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerrero et al. (ES-2930209-A1 – Refer to machine translation attached in office action dated 2026-03-25 for references cited) in view of Weis (US-20200166558-A1) in further view of Wei (US-8698504-B2).
Regarding Claim 16, Guerrero teaches a mobile machine (page 3 para 3 teaches system can be used on an electric vehicle) configured for detecting a source of a ground fault, the mobile machine comprising:
a battery string including at least one battery cell (Fig 1: electrical energy storage device, 6);
an electrical bus coupled with the battery string (Fig 1: electrical conductors, 3a & 3b);
a first electrical converter (Fig 1: First AC-DC converter) and a second electrical converter (Fig 1: DC-DC converter, 1e), each of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter coupled with the electrical bus (can be seen in Fig 1),
a voltage sensor configured for sensing a voltage (Fig 2: voltage meter, 17);
a controller configured to receive the voltage (Fig 2: processing media, 20);
detecting, using the voltage, a switching frequency (Page 9 Para 3 teaches the detection of a switching frequency of a converter based on the measured voltage).
Guerrero does not explicitly teach the first electrical converter configured for operating at a first switching frequency and the second electrical converter configured for operating at a second switching frequency, wherein the first switching frequency is different from the second switching frequency;
a voltage sensor coupled with the electrical bus and configured for sensing a voltage of the electrical bus;
the controller configured to detect ground faults by:
detecting, using the voltage, at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency; and
identifying, based on the detected at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency, at least one of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter as the source of the ground fault;
However, Weis teaches the first electrical converter configured for operating at a first switching frequency and the second electrical converter configured for operating at a second switching frequency, wherein the first switching frequency is different from the second switching frequency (Para [0026] teaches the converters may have different switching frequencies);
a voltage sensor coupled with the electrical bus and configured for sensing a voltage of the electrical bus Para [0040-0041] teaches sensing the voltage of the power transmission network, 5, therefore a sensor must exist to identify the voltage);
a controller configured to receive the voltage (Para [0040-0041] teaches identifying based on the voltage sensed which converter is at fault, therefore a controller must exist to perform this action), the controller configured to detect ground faults by:
detecting, using the voltage, at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency (Para [0026] and Para [0041] teach detecting the switching frequencies on the converters); and
identifying, based on the detected at least one of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency, at least one of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter as the source of the ground fault (Para [0026] and Para [0041] teach identifying which converter is at fault based on the switching frequency detected);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the machine of Guerrero to include the fault identification of Weis. A motivation for this modification is identifying the fault location makes it possible to shut down the associated faulty converter as taught by Weis Para [0028].
The combination of Guerrero in view of Weis does not explicitly teach a user interface configured to receive data from the controller representing the identified at least one of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter as the source of the ground fault. However, Wei teaches a user interface (Fig 1: display, 42) configured to receive data from the controller representing the identified at least one of the first electrical converter and the second electrical converter as the source of the ground fault (Para 4 lines 57-67 teaches the location of the ground fault may be identified, and para 4 lines 27-30 teaches that information about the ground fault may be displayed to a user through the display). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the machine of Guerrero in view of Weis to include the display of Wei. A motivation for this modification is to alert to a human so that action may be taken to repair the circuit.
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Guerrero in view of Weis in view of Wei, as presented with respect to claim 16, teaches analyzing a frequency content of the voltage to determine a presence of one or more of the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency (Weis - Para [0026] and Para [0041] teach identifying which converter is at fault based on the switching frequency detected).
Regarding Claim 19, Guerrero further teaches performing a Fourier transform on the sensed voltage (Page 6 Para 1 teaches using a Fourier transform to estimate a value based on the measured value).
Claims 2-3 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerrero in view of Weis in view of Bhalwankar et al. (EP-3582356-A2).
Regarding Claim 2, Guerrero in view of Weis does not explicitly teach a filter configured to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency. However, Bhalwankar teaches a filter configured to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency (Para [0025]-[0029] teaches using a filter to block frequencies below and above a band of frequencies in order to identify ground faults, these frequencies corresponding to the frequencies the equipment operates at). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the machine of the combination to have incorporated the filters of Bhalwankar. A motivation for this modification is to identify the presence of ground faults using the frequency characteristics of the equipment as taught in Bhalwankar in Para [0025].
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Guerrero in view of Weis does not teach a first filter configured to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and above the first switching frequency; and a second filter configured to block frequencies below the second switching frequency and above the second switching frequency.
However, Bhalwankar teaches a first filter configured to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and above the first switching frequency (Bhalwankar - Para [0025] teaches a 3rd passband consisting of switching frequencies between 20kHz and 50kHz, and Fig 10 shows a filter configured for that range, therefore it is configured to block frequencies above and below a switching frequency); and a second filter configured to block frequencies below the second switching frequency and above the second switching frequency (Bhalwankar - Figs 9-10 show multiple filters (264, 284, 384, 484). Para [0025]-[0029] teaches using filters to detect the presence of ground faults based on operating frequency of the equipment used, further Para [0025] teaches the passbands may be tuned based on the characteristics of the equipment). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the machine of the combination to have incorporated the filters of Bhalwankar. A motivation for this modification is to identify the presence of ground faults using the frequency characteristics of the equipment as taught in Bhalwankar in Para [0025].
Regarding Claim 10, Guerrero in view of Weis does not explicitly teach filtering to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency. However, Bhalwankar teaches filtering to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and the second switching frequency (Para [0025]-[0029] teaches using a filter to block frequencies below and above a band of frequencies in order to identify ground faults, these frequencies corresponding to the frequencies the equipment operates at). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the machine of Guerrero in view of Weis to have incorporated the filters of Bhalwankar. A motivation for this modification is to identify the presence of ground faults using the frequency characteristics of the equipment as taught in Bhalwankar in Para [0025].
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Guerrero in view of Weis does not explicitly teach filtering to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and above the first switching frequency; and filtering to block frequencies below the second switching frequency and above the second switching frequency.
However, Bhalwankar teaches filtering to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and above the first switching frequency (Bhalwankar - Para [0025] teaches a 3rd passband consisting of switching frequencies between 20kHz and 50kHz, and Fig 10 shows a filter configured for that range, therefore it is configured to block frequencies above and below a switching frequency); and
filtering to block frequencies below the second switching frequency and above the second switching frequency (Bhalwankar - Figs 9-10 show multiple filters (264, 284, 384, 484). Para [0025]-[0029] teaches using filters to detect the presence of ground faults based on operating frequency of the equipment used, further Para [0025] teaches the passbands may be tuned based on the characteristics of the equipment). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the machine of Guerrero in view of Weis to have incorporated the filters of Bhalwankar. A motivation for this modification is to identify the presence of ground faults using the frequency characteristics of the equipment as taught in Bhalwankar in Para [0025].
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerrero in view of Weis in view of Hu et al. (US-20180241200-A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Guerrero in view of Weis does not teach wherein the controller is a first controller, wherein the mobile machine is configured for operating in a normal mode and a service mode, wherein in the service mode, a second controller is configured for:
operating the first electrical converter at the first switching frequency; and
operating the second electrical converter at the second switching frequency.
However, Hu teaches wherein the controller is a first controller, wherein the mobile machine is configured for operating in a normal mode and a service mode, wherein in the service mode, a second controller (Fig 5 shows multiple controllers, 121 -124) is configured for:
operating the first electrical converter at the first switching frequency; and
operating the second electrical converter at the second switching frequency (Para [0141]-[0142] teaches the controllers may operate the converters, 3, at different switching frequencies).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the machine of Guerrero in view of Weis to include the 2nd controller of Hu. A motivation for this modification is the controller performing the switching frequency improves signal to noise ratio and provides the benefit of fault location, as taught by Hu in Para [0141].
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Guerrero in view of Weis in view of Hu, as presented with respect to claim 7, teaches operating the first electrical converter at the first switching frequency; and
operating the second electrical converter at the first switching frequency (Hu - Para [0152]-[0153] teaches the controllers, 12, may operate the converters at the same switching frequency). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerrero in view of Weis in view of Wei in view of Bhalwankar.
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Guerrero in view of Weis in view of Wei does not teach a first filter configured to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and above the first switching frequency. However, Bhalwankar teaches a first filter configured to block frequencies below the first switching frequency and above the first switching frequency (Para [0025]-[0029] teaches using a filter to block frequencies below and above a band of frequencies in order to identify ground faults, these frequencies corresponding to the frequencies the equipment operates at). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combination to have incorporated the filters of Bhalwankar. A motivation for this modification is to identify the presence of ground faults using the frequency characteristics of the equipment as taught in Bhalwankar in Para [0025].
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guerrero in view of Weis in view of Wei in view of Hu.
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Guerrero in view of Weis in view of Wei does teach a first controller (Fig 2: processing media, 20) and operation in a normal mode. However, the combination does not teach wherein the mobile machine is configured for operating in a service mode, wherein in the service mode, a second controller is configured for:
operating the first electrical converter at the first switching frequency; and operating the second electrical converter at the second switching frequency.
However, Hu teaches wherein the machine is configured for operating in a service mode, wherein in the service mode, a second controller (Fig 5 shows multiple controllers, 121 -124 ) is configured for:
operating the first electrical converter at the first switching frequency; and operating the second electrical converter at the second switching frequency (Para [0141]-[0142] teaches the controllers may operate the converters, 3, at different switching frequencies). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the machine of the combination to include the 2nd controller of Hu. A motivation for this modification is the controller performing the switching frequency improves signal to noise ratio and provides the benefit of fault location, as taught by Hu in Para [0141].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMIAH J BARRON whose telephone number is (571)272-0902. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 09:30-17:30 ET.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at (571) 270-5628. 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.
/JEREMIAH J BARRON/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights