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 1, 4, 5 and 13-15 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.
With respect to claim 1 and 13, it is unclear and indefinite of what is meant by “in response to the torque command meeting a zero-torque criterion while the present speed meets a below-base-speed criterion,”
It does say what is done/action taken in response to zero torque criterion, just what is done if speed is below base speed ?
With respect to claims 4, 5, 6, 14, 15, and 16, it is indefinite of what is meant by “predetermined margin of zero torque”. Paragraph 0029 says the predefined margin could be above/below zero torque. Zero is zero, above zero is not zero. Another wording use could be used but calling non zero torque, a zero torque is indefinite and unclear.
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)(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, 4-10, 12, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being taught by Nobumoto (PGPUB 2020/0391611).
With respect to claim 1, Nobumoto teaches method comprising:
receiving, by a motor controller (fig. 1, 22), a torque command (paragraph 0045, second sentence) for a permanent magnet motor (fig. 1, 12a) of an electric vehicle (fig. 1, 1),
wherein the permanent magnet motor is coupled to an inverter (fig. 1, 20a) having transistors (paragraph 0032; igbt transistors), and wherein the permanent magnet motor has a present speed (paragraph 0048; first sentence, base revolutions/speed);
determining a present base speed (paragraph 0066) of the permanent magnet motor; and
in response to the torque command meeting a zero-torque criterion (paragraph 0045) while the present speed meets a below-base-speed criterion (paragraph 0094; 170 below revolution/speed to servo-off), ceasing, by the motor controller, a toggling of the transistors so that the transistors are nonconductive (paragraph 0043; servo-off stops switching).
With respect to claim 4, Nobumoto teaches wherein the zero-torque criterion comprises that the torque command is within a predefined margin of zero torque (paragraph 0045).
With respect to claim 5, Nobumoto teaches wherein the zero-torque criterion further comprises that the torque command is within the predefined margin of zero torque for at least a predefined time (paragraph 0086; controller determines in time of battery temp/voltage, speed of motor).
With respect to claim 6, Nobumoto teaches wherein the below-base-speed criterion comprises that the present speed is lower than the present base speed by at least a predefined margin (paragraph 0045).
With respect to claim 7, Nobumoto teaches further comprising: determining, after ceasing the toggling of the transistors, (fig. 8, after S180; end cycle and back to obtaining switching operation) that the torque command does not meet the zero-torque criterion; and in response to the determination, initiating toggling of the transistors.
With respect to claim 8, Nobumoto teaches wherein the zero-torque criterion comprises that the torque command is within a predefined margin of zero torque (paragraph 0045).
With respect to claim 9, Nobumoto teaches further comprising: determining, after ceasing the toggling of the transistors, that (fig. 8, after S180; end cycle and back to obtaining switching operation) the present speed does not meet the below-base-speed criterion; and in response to the determination, initiating toggling of the transistors.
With respect to claim 10, Nobumoto teaches wherein the below-base-speed criterion comprises that the present speed is lower than the present base speed by at least a predefined margin (paragraph 0045).
With respect to claim 12, Nobumoto teaches an permanent magnet motor comprising:
a motor controller (fig. 1, 22) to receive a torque command (paragraph 0045, second sentence) and determine a present base speed (paragraph 0048; first sentence, base revolutions/speed) of the permanent magnet motor (fig. 1, 12a);
an inverter (fig. 1, 20a) having transistors (paragraph 0032; igbt transistors); and
a sensor (fig. 1, 32) indicating a present speed (paragraph 0066) of the permanent magnet motor;
wherein in response to the torque command meeting a zero-torque criterion (paragraph 0045) while the present speed meets a below-base-speed criterion (paragraph 0094; 170 below revolution/speed to servo-off),
the motor controller ceases a toggling of the transistors so that the transistors are nonconductive (paragraph 0043; servo-off stops switching).
With respect to claim 14, Nobumoto teaches wherein the zero-torque criterion comprises that the torque command is within a predefined margin of zero torque (paragraph 0045).
With respect to claim 15, Nobumoto teaches wherein the zero-torque criterion further comprises that the torque command is within the predefined margin of zero torque for at least a predefined time (paragraph 0086; controller determines in time of battery temp/voltage, speed of motor).
With respect to claim 16, Nobumoto teaches wherein the below-base-speed criterion comprises that the present speed is lower than the present base speed by at least a predefined margin (paragraph 0045).
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, 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.
Claim(s) 3, 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nobumoto (PGPUB 2020/0391611).
With respect to claims 3, Nobumoto does not teach wherein the present base speed is determined based on at least a direct-current voltage of the inverter and a back electromotive force constant of the permanent magnet motor.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to for base speed to be based on DC voltage and bemf, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416
With respect to claims 11 and 17, Nobumoto does not teach wherein the transistors are metal-oxide semiconductor field-effect transistors. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to transistor of Nobumoto to be mosfet, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICK DAVID GLASS whose telephone number is (571)272-8395. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri_8-5pm.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at 571-272-2060. 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.
/ERICK D GLASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846