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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/23/2024, 04/02/2025 and 07/09/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy 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.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claim(s) 1 - 2, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by US Pub. No. 2019/0135117 A1; (hereinafter Kunomura et al)
Regarding claim 1, Kunomura et al [e.g., Figs. 1 and 4] discloses a power conversion device [e.g., main circuit system 10], comprising: a power converter that converts power between an alternating-current (AC) system and a direct-current (DC) circuit [e.g., converter 13, p. 0039 recites “The converter 13 of the present embodiment, for example, converts 1000 V AC of the secondary output power of the main transformer 12 into 2000 V DC and outputs the resulting DC power.”]; and a control device that controls the power converter [e.g., power conversion controller 21], wherein the control device includes: a command generation unit for generating a reactive-current command value for the power converter [e.g., -- refer to Fig. 4 for Power Conversion Controller 60 --, AC Voltage Control circuit 34 generating reactive current command initial value Qr1], based on an AC voltage of the AC system and an AC- voltage command value [e.g., based on detection value Vtr detected on AC side via main transformer 12 and voltage detection 26 and Vref set by Voltage Command Value Setter 32, p. 0041 recites “The overhead line voltage detector 26 is provided to detect a value of an overhead line voltage which is a voltage received from the overhead line 100 by the pantograph 11. The overhead line voltage detector 26 outputs a value corresponding to a voltage value of the tertiary output power outputted from the tertiary winding 12c of the main transformer 12, that is, an overhead line voltage detection value Vtr (hereinafter, detection value Vtr) indicating a magnitude of the overhead line voltage to the power conversion controller 21.”]; and a fault determination unit for determining presence or absence of occurrence of a fault in the AC system, based on the AC voltage [e.g., fault detected by Low Voltage Detection circuit 62 p. 0102 recites “The low voltage detection circuit 62 is provided to detect that the value of the overhead line voltage is outside a proper range and is a low value. In particular, a threshold value is set for the detection value Vtr.”], wherein when the fault occurred in the AC system has been cleared, the command generation unit generates the reactive-current command value so that a leading reactive current output from the power converter is limited [e.g., operates as normal once fault is cleared, p, 0101 - 0103 recites “In the present embodiment, the overhead line voltage is monitored, and, when a low voltage which does not occur during normal operation is detected, the command value Qref is forcibly set to 0, so that unnecessary consumption of the leading reactive current is suppressed at the time of power failure in the feeding circuit…. When 1 is inputted from the low voltage detection circuit 62, that is, when the detection value Vtr is equal to or more than 0.6 [pu] and the overhead line voltage is in the proper range, the limiter output value Qr3 is outputted as the command value Qref. On the other hand, when 0 is inputted from the low voltage detection circuit 62, that is, when the detection value Vtr is less than 0.6 [pu] and the overhead line voltage is in improper low voltage state, the command value Qref is forcibly set to 0.”].
Regarding claim 2, Kunomura et al [e.g., Figs. 1 and 4] discloses wherein the command generation unit includes: an AC-voltage control unit for generating the reactive-current command value so that the AC voltage of the AC system follows the AC-voltage command value [e.g., reactive current Qref generated by Power Conversion Controller 60, p. 0018 recites “The initial value calculator is configured to calculate a reactive current command initial value which is an initial value of the reactive current command value for causing an overhead line voltage detection value to follow a voltage command value based on a difference between the voltage command value and the overhead line voltage detection value.”]; and a reactive-current regulation unit [e.g., limiter circuit 38] for limiting the reactive-current command value generated by the AC-voltage control unit to a limit range [e.g., limiter circuit 38 limits the maximum value of Qr2], when the fault occurred in the AC system has been cleared [e.g., when fault is cleared and circuit is performing in normal conditions, p.0070 -0071 recites “The limiter circuit 38 limits the maximum value of the adjustment value Qr2 calculated in the multiplier 36 and outputs the limited value as the final command value Qref. In particular, when the adjustment value Qr2 is equal to or lower than the upper limit value Qup, the adjustment value Qr2 is outputted as the command value Qref. If the adjustment value Qr2 exceeds the upper limit value Qup, the upper limit value Qup is outputted as the command value Qref….The upper limit value Qup is set by the upper limit value setter 37.”].
Regarding claim 8, Kunomura et al [e.g., Figs. 1 and 4] discloses wherein the command generation unit includes an AC-voltage control unit for generating the reactive-current command value so that the AC voltage of the AC system follows the AC-voltage command value [e.g., reactive current Qref generated by Power Conversion Controller 60, p. 0018 recites “The initial value calculator is configured to calculate a reactive current command initial value which is an initial value of the reactive current command value for causing an overhead line voltage detection value to follow a voltage command value based on a difference between the voltage command value and the overhead line voltage detection value.”], wherein the AC-voltage control unit is configured of a feedback controller which includes a proportioner and an integrator [e.g., AC voltage control circuit 34, p. 0061 recites “The AC voltage control circuit 34 includes, for example, a proportional integration circuit, a primary delay circuit or the like.”], the command generation unit further includes a reset unit for resetting an integration value of the integrator [e.g., Voltage command value setter 32 and adder 33 sets command value Vref as target value], and when the fault in the AC system has been cleared, the reset unit resets the integration value to limit the reactive-current command value [e.g., when fault is cleared and circuit is performing in normal conditions, p.0059 -0060 recites “The voltage command value setter 32 sets the command value Vref [pu] as a target value for the detection value Vtr. What value in particular to be set as the command value Vref may be determined as appropriate. For example, the detection value Vtr when the overhead line voltage is 28 kV may be set as the command value Vref so that the overhead line voltage from the overhead line 100 is maintained to be 28 kV…. The adder 33 calculates the aforementioned voltage difference ΔV which is a difference between the command value Vref set in the voltage command value setter 32 and the detection value Vtr.”].
8. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by US Pub. No. 2016/0118803 A1; (hereinafter Takahashi et al), cited in IDS dated 07/09/2025
Regarding claim 12, Takahashi et al [e.g., Figs. 3 and 18] discloses a power conversion device [e.g., power conditioning system 400], comprising: a power converter that converts power between an alternating-current (AC) system and a direct-current (DC) circuit [e.g., DC/AC converter converts power between DC and AC]; and a control device that controls the power converter [e.g., rest of Power conditioning system 400], wherein the control device includes a command generation unit for generating a reactive-current command value for the power converter [e.g., Control Unit 440]; and the command generation unit: reactive-current command value for the power converter [e.g., Control Unit 440 controls reactive power supplied from the power conditioning system 400 corresponding to the connection point voltage measurement value]; and the command generation unit: generates, when the AC voltage is greater than or equal to a threshold, the reactive-current command value so that the AC voltage of the AC system follows an AC-voltage command value [e.g., --refer to Fig. 18 --, p. 0115 recites “When the connection point voltage measurement value is larger than the target voltage upper limit value, the control unit 440 increases the reactive power in the negative direction as the connection point voltage measurement value increases,...”]; and generates, when the AC voltage is less than the threshold, the reactive- current command value so that a lagging reactive current is output from the power converter [e.g., p. 0115 recites “When the connection point voltage measurement value is smaller than the target voltage lower limit value, the control unit 440 increases the reactive power in the positive direction as the connection point voltage measurement value decreases, and thus the lagging reactive power is generated from the DC/AC inverter 420 to the power distribution line 210. Thus, with the PCS 400, connected with the power distribution line 210, generating the lagging reactive power, the voltage of the power distribution line 210 can be raised.”].
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.
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.
11. Claim(s) 3, 5 - 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunomura et al in view of JP H05173654 A; (hereinafter Kunomura et al and Noda et al). Noda et al cited in IDS dated 05/23/2024
Regarding claim 3, Kunomura et al [e.g., Figs. 1 and 4] discloses wherein the reactive-current regulation unit limits the reactive-current command value within the limit range that is set to a predetermined value or less [e.g., reactive current command value limited to be less than the upper limit value, p.0023 recites “Further, the upper limit value is set for the reactive current command adjustment value. When the reactive current command adjustment value is equal to or lower than the upper limit value, the reactive current command adjustment value is outputted without change as the reactive current command value. However, when the reactive current command adjustment value exceeds the upper limit value, the upper limit value is outputted as the reactive current command value. That is, priority is given to supply of the required active power to the load. The reactive current command value to be finally outputted is limited to the upper limit value at maximum.”].
Kunomura et al does not discloses wherein the reactive-current regulation unit limits the reactive-current command value within the limit range that is set to a predetermined value or less, until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the fault in the AC system has been cleared.
Noda et al [e.g., Figs. 1 - 3] teaches wherein the reactive-current regulation unit limits the reactive-current command value within the limit range that is set to a predetermined value or less [e.g., reactive power limiter 14 limits reactive current command Q that is set to Qmax to -Qmax], until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the fault in the AC system has been cleared [e.g., until tcon passes, p. 0009 recites “Here, when voltage fault occurs in the AC system decreases, the output is "ON", and undervoltage relay 17, as shown in FIG. 3, whereby the output of the timer 18 becomes "ON". The timer 18 for holding the "ON" signal a certain period of time tcon. tcon the time of the accident detected until the fault is cleared, after the accident removal transient disturbances is set to the time plus the time to converge. Output "ON" signal of the timer 18, by being applied to the switch 19, the switch is switched to the terminal Bs. Thus, Qmax (2) is selected as the upper limit of reactive power limiter (limit value on the positive side). Therefore, it is possible to suppress the supply to AC system reactive power.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kunomura et al with wherein the reactive-current regulation unit limits the reactive-current command value within the limit range that is set to a predetermined value or less, until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the fault in the AC system has been cleared as suggested by Noda et al to suppress overvoltage fluctuations once the system recovers.
Regarding claim 5, Kunomura et al discloses the claimed invention except for the reactive-current regulation unit sets the limit range to a negative limit value, and regulates the reactive-current command value to the negative limit value.
Noda et al [e.g., Figs. 1 - 3] teaches the reactive-current regulation unit sets [e.g., power limiter 14] the limit range to a negative limit value [e.g., -Qmax], and regulates the reactive-current command value to the negative limit value [e.g., p. 0010 recites “While the state is continuing, a voltage is accident removal work protection is restored in the AC system. This immediately after the accident removal is likely to overvoltage due to supply of reactive power, are the case of applying the present invention, the reactive power to be supplied to the system from the transducer is limited to Qmax (2) (= 0) Therefore, it is possible to suppress the overvoltage immediately after the accident elimination. Moreover, even for overvoltages that may occur during subsequent voltage recovery, reactive power because it is controlled within the range of -Qmax (1) ~Qmax (2) (= 0), the reactive power it is possible to suppress the overvoltage by the transducer is consumed. However, where the sign of the reactive power, in a direction to lower the AC voltage converter consumes reactive power minus (negative) direction, a direction to raise the ac voltage converter reactive power is supplied to the system plus (positive) are taking in the direction. Incidentally, the hatched portion is the control range of the reactive power. By using the control circuit of the self-commutated converter according to the above embodiment, the AC grid failure prevents supply to system of extra reactive power at the time, yet controlled to allow for reactive power consumption in the converter can. Therefore, to suppress the overvoltage generated by the AC system can be reduced system fluctuation.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kunomura et al with the reactive-current regulation unit sets the limit range to a negative limit value, and regulates the reactive-current command value to the negative limit value as suggested by Noda et al to suppress overvoltage fluctuations as a result of extra reactive power at the time of a fault or recovery.
Regarding claim 6, Kunomura et al discloses the claimed invention except for the wherein the reactive-current regulation unit outputs the reactive-current command value regulated to the negative limit value, until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the fault in the AC system has been cleared.
Noda et al [e.g., Figs. 1 - 3] teaches wherein the reactive-current regulation unit outputs the reactive-current command value regulated to the negative limit value [e.g., -Qmax], until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the fault in the AC system has been cleared [e.g., time of accident detected tcon p. 0009 - 0010 recites “Here, when voltage fault occurs in the AC system decreases, the output is "ON", and undervoltage relay 17, as shown in FIG. 3, whereby the output of the timer 18 becomes "ON". The timer 18 for holding the "ON" signal a certain period of time tcon. tcon the time of the accident detected until the fault is cleared, after the accident removal transient disturbances is set to the time plus the time to converge. … While the state is continuing, a voltage is accident removal work protection is restored in the AC system. This immediately after the accident removal is likely to overvoltage due to supply of reactive power, are the case of applying the present invention, the reactive power to be supplied to the system from the transducer is limited to Qmax (2) (= 0) Therefore, it is possible to suppress the overvoltage immediately after the accident elimination. Moreover, even for overvoltages that may occur during subsequent voltage recovery, reactive power because it is controlled within the range of -Qmax (1) ~Qmax (2) (= 0), the reactive power it is possible to suppress the overvoltage by the transducer is consumed. However, where the sign of the reactive power, in a direction to lower the AC voltage converter consumes reactive power minus (negative) direction, a direction to raise the ac voltage converter reactive power is supplied to the system plus (positive) are taking in the direction. Incidentally, the hatched portion is the control range of the reactive power. By using the control circuit of the self-commutated converter according to the above embodiment, the AC grid failure prevents supply to system of extra reactive power at the time, yet controlled to allow for reactive power consumption in the converter can. Therefore, to suppress the overvoltage generated by the AC system can be reduced system fluctuation.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kunomura et al with wherein the reactive-current regulation unit outputs the reactive-current command value regulated to the negative limit value, until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the fault in the AC system has been cleared as suggested by Noda et al to suppress overvoltage fluctuations as a result of extra reactive power at the time of a fault or recovery.
Regarding claim 9, Kunomura et al [e.g., Figs. 1 and 4] discloses a power conversion device [e.g., main circuit system 10], comprising: a power converter that converts power between an alternating-current (AC) system and a direct-current (DC) circuit [e.g., converter 30]; and a control device that controls the power converter [e.g., power conversion controller 21], wherein the control device includes: a command generation unit for generating a reactive-current command value for the power converter [e.g., -- refer to Fig. 6 for power conversion controller 60 --, AC voltage control circuit 34 generates reactive current command Qr], based on an AC voltage of the AC system and an AC-voltage command value [e.g., based on Vtr]; and a fault determination unit for determining presence or absence of occurrence of a fault in the AC system, based on the AC voltage [e.g., low voltage detection circuit 62].
Kunomura et al does not disclose wherein the command generation unit: generates the reactive-current command value so that the AC voltage of the AC system follows the AC-voltage command value, until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the occurrence of the fault in the AC system; limits the reactive-current command value after the elapse of the predetermined amount of time; and cancels limiting the reactive-current command value, after the elapse of the predetermined amount of time and when the fault in the AC system has been cleared.
Noda et al [e.g., Figs. 1 - 3] teaches wherein the command generation unit: generates the reactive-current command value so that the AC voltage of the AC system follows the AC-voltage command value [e.g., output Q from reactive power limiter 14], until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the occurrence of the fault in the AC system [e.g., -- refer to Fig. 3 for timing diagram --, fixed time tcon,]; limits the reactive-current command value after the elapse of the predetermined amount of time [e.g., limits output Q after tcon has passed (normal operation)]; and cancels limiting the reactive-current command value, after the elapse of the predetermined amount of time and when the fault in the AC system has been cleared [e.g., p. 0009 recites “Here, when voltage fault occurs in the AC system decreases, the output is "ON", and undervoltage relay 17, as shown in FIG. 3, whereby the output of the timer 18 becomes "ON". The timer 18 for holding the "ON" signal a certain period of time tcon. tcon the time of the accident detected until the fault is cleared, after the accident removal transient disturbances is set to the time plus the time to converge.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kunomura et al with wherein the command generation unit: generates the reactive-current command value so that the AC voltage of the AC system follows the AC-voltage command value, until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the occurrence of the fault in the AC system; limits the reactive-current command value after the elapse of the predetermined amount of time; and cancels limiting the reactive-current command value, after the elapse of the predetermined amount of time and when the fault in the AC system has been cleared as suggested by Noda et al to suppress overvoltage fluctuations when the system recovers from a fault due to the reactive power.
12. Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunomura et al in view of Noda et al and Takahashi et al; (hereinafter Kunomura et al, Noda et al and Takahashi et al).
Regarding claim 7, Kunomura et al discloses the claimed invention except for wherein when the fault in the AC system has been cleared, the reactive-current regulation unit regulates the reactive-current command value to the negative limit value, and, subsequently, gradually increases over time an upper limit for the limit range.
Noda et al [e.g., Figs. 1 - 3] teaches wherein when the fault in the AC system has been cleared [e.g., when normal operations state is returned], the reactive-current regulation unit regulates the reactive-current command value to the negative limit value [e.g., p. 0012 recites “From these examples, it is understood that the present invention achieves the object by limiting the limiter in the positive direction of the reactive power, that is, in the direction of increasing the AC voltage when an AC system fault occurs. Further, in the operation explanatory view of FIG. 3, when the signal of the timer 18 changes from “ON” to “OFF” and the normal operation state is returned, the limiter is returned to the original state step by step, but it is a transient state. When it is necessary to reduce the fluctuation, a circuit having a time constant and gradually returning to the original state may be provided.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kunomura et al with wherein when the fault in the AC system has been cleared, the reactive-current regulation unit regulates the reactive-current command value to the negative limit value as suggested by Noda et al to reduce fluctuations after the fault has cleared and gradually return the circuit to normal operation conditions.
Noda et al does not teach subsequently, gradually increases over time an upper limit for the limit range.
Takahashi et al [e.g., Figs. 3, 8 and 22] teaches subsequently, gradually increases over time an upper limit for the limit range [e.g.,-- refer to Fig. 22 for voltage-reactive power control level --, increases Target voltage upper limit value over time,…”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kunomura et al with subsequently, gradually increases over time an upper limit for the limit range as suggested by Takahashi et al to prevent the voltage range to rapidly increase/decrease and prevent excessive reactive power to be supplied.
13. Claim(s) 4, 10 - 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunomura et al in view of Takahashi et al; (hereinafter Kunomura et al and Takahashi et al).
Regarding claim 4, Kunomura et al [e.g., Figs. 1 and 4] discloses wherein when the fault in the AC system has been cleared [e.g., during normal operations], the reactive-current regulation unit sets the limit range to a predetermined value or less [e.g., p.0023 recites “Further, the upper limit value is set for the reactive current command adjustment value. When the reactive current command adjustment value is equal to or lower than the upper limit value, the reactive current command adjustment value is outputted without change as the reactive current command value. However, when the reactive current command adjustment value exceeds the upper limit value, the upper limit value is outputted as the reactive current command value. That is, priority is given to supply of the required active power to the load. The reactive current command value to be finally outputted is limited to the upper limit value at maximum.”].
Kunomura et al does not discloses subsequently, gradually increases over time an upper limit for the limit range.
Takahashi et al [e.g., Figs. 3, 8 and 22] teaches subsequently, gradually increases over time an upper limit for the limit range [e.g.,-- refer to Fig. 22 for voltage-reactive power control level --, increases Target voltage upper limit value over time, ].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kunomura et al with subsequently, gradually increases over time an upper limit for the limit range as suggested by Takahashi et al to prevent the voltage range to rapidly increase/decrease and prevent excessive reactive power to be supplied.
Regarding claim 10, Kunomura et al [e.g., Figs. 1 and 4] discloses a power conversion device [e.g., main circuit system 10], comprising: a power converter that converts power between an alternating-current (AC) system and a direct-current (DC) circuit [e.g., converter 13, p. 0039 recites “The converter 13 of the present embodiment, for example, converts 1000 V AC of the secondary output power of the main transformer 12 into 2000 V DC and outputs the resulting DC power.”]; and a control device that controls the power converter [e.g., power conversion controller 21], wherein the control device includes: a command generation unit for generating a reactive-current command value for the power converter [e.g., active current command value generator 31]; and a fault determination unit for determining presence or absence of occurrence of a fault in the AC system, based on the AC voltage of the AC system [e.g., fault generated on the AC side p. 0101 recites “That is, in the feeding circuit where the subject train is in position, when, for example, a ground fault or a short circuit fault occurs and the feeding circuit is in power failure state, there is no necessity to control the leading reactive current to be aggressively consumed in the subject train. Rather, such a control should be stopped. In the present embodiment, the overhead line voltage is monitored, and, when a low voltage which does not occur during normal operation is detected, the command value Qref is forcibly set to 0, so that unnecessary consumption of the leading reactive current is suppressed at the time of power failure in the feeding circuit.”], and when the fault occurred in the AC system has been cleared, the command generation unit shifts the reactive-current command value in a leading direction [e.g., operates as normal once fault is cleared, p, 0101 - 0103 recites “In the present embodiment, the overhead line voltage is monitored, and, when a low voltage which does not occur during normal operation is detected, the command value Qref is forcibly set to 0, so that unnecessary consumption of the leading reactive current is suppressed at the time of power failure in the feeding circuit…. The output multiplier 61 multiplies the limiter output value Qr3 outputted from the limiter circuit 38 and 1 or 0 outputted from the low voltage detection circuit 62, and outputs a result of the multiplication as the command value Qref. When 1 is inputted from the low voltage detection circuit 62, that is, when the detection value Vtr is equal to or more than 0.6 [pu] and the overhead line voltage is in the proper range, the limiter output value Qr3 is outputted as the command value Qref. On the other hand, when 0 is inputted from the low voltage detection circuit 62, that is, when the detection value Vtr is less than 0.6 [pu] and the overhead line voltage is in improper low voltage state, the command value Qref is forcibly set to 0.”].
Kunomura et al does not disclose wherein upon the occurrence of the fault in the AC system, the command generation unit generates the reactive-current command value so that a lagging reactive current is output from the power converter.
Takahashi et al [e.g., Figs. 3 and 18] teaches wherein upon the occurrence of the fault in the AC system, the command generation unit generates the reactive-current command value so that a lagging reactive current is output from the power converter [e.g., p. 0115 recites “When the connection point voltage measurement value is smaller than the target voltage lower limit value, the control unit 440 increases the reactive power in the positive direction as the connection point voltage measurement value decreases, and thus the lagging reactive power is generated from the DC/AC inverter 420 to the power distribution line 210. Thus, with the PCS 400, connected with the power distribution line 210, generating the lagging reactive power, the voltage of the power distribution line 210 can be raised.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kunomura et al wherein upon the occurrence of the fault in the AC system, the command generation unit generates the reactive-current command value so that a lagging reactive current is output from the power converter as suggested by Takahashi et al to control the reactive power before the connection point voltage falls out of the prescribed range.
Regarding claim 11, Kunomura et al [e.g., Figs. 1 and 4] discloses wherein the command generation unit includes: an AC-voltage control unit for generating the reactive-current command value so that the AC voltage of the AC system follows an AC-voltage command value [e.g., reactive current Qref generated by Power Conversion Controller 60, p. 0018 recites “The initial value calculator is configured to calculate a reactive current command initial value which is an initial value of the reactive current command value for causing an overhead line voltage detection value to follow a voltage command value based on a difference between the voltage command value and the overhead line voltage detection value.”]; and a reactive-current regulation unit for regulating the reactive-current command value generated by the AC-voltage control unit [e.g., limiter circuit 38, p.0070 -0071 recites “The limiter circuit 38 limits the maximum value of the adjustment value Qr2 calculated in the multiplier 36 and outputs the limited value as the final command value Qref. In particular, when the adjustment value Qr2 is equal to or lower than the upper limit value Qup, the adjustment value Qr2 is outputted as the command value Qref. If the adjustment value Qr2 exceeds the upper limit value Qup, the upper limit value Qup is outputted as the command value Qref….The upper limit value Qup is set by the upper limit value setter 37.”].
Kunomura et al does not disclose wherein the reactive-current regulation unit: regulates the reactive-current command value so that a lagging reactive current is output from the power converter, until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the fault in the AC system has been cleared; and stops regulating the reactive-current command value after the elapse of the predetermined amount of time.
Takahashi et al [e.g., Fig. 3, 18 and 21] teaches wherein the reactive-current regulation unit: regulates the reactive-current command value so that a lagging reactive current is output from the power converter [e.g., p. 0115 recites “When the connection point voltage measurement value is smaller than the target voltage lower limit value, the control unit 440 increases the reactive power in the positive direction as the connection point voltage measurement value decreases, and thus the lagging reactive power is generated from the DC/AC inverter 420 to the power distribution line 210. Thus, with the PCS 400, connected with the power distribution line 210, generating the lagging reactive power, the voltage of the power distribution line 210 can be raised.”], until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the fault in the AC system has been cleared [e.g., reduces voltage-reactive power control level when power distribution line voltage measurement value stays within the prescribed voltage range is maintained over a predetermined voltage restoration time period, p. 0125 recites “When the state where the power distribution line voltage measurement value stays within the prescribed voltage range is maintained over a predetermined voltage restoration time period, the optimization unit 520 of the PCS integrated control apparatus 500 reduces the voltage-reactive power control level.”]; and stops regulating the reactive-current command value after the elapse of the predetermined amount of time [e.g., stops generating voltage-reactive power control level when connection point voltage is within target voltage range, p. 0115 recites “When the connection point voltage measurement value is within the target voltage range, the control unit 440 does not control the reactive power of the PCS 400.”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kunomura et al wherein the reactive-current regulation unit: regulates the reactive-current command value so that a lagging reactive current is output from the power converter, until an elapse of a predetermined amount of time since the fault in the AC system has been cleared; and stops regulating the reactive-current command value after the elapse of the predetermined amount of time as suggested by Takahashi et al to prevent the voltage-reactive power control level to immediately increase after decreasing or vice versa.
Examiner’s Note
14. Examiner has cited particular paragraphs 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 figure 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 disclosed by the Examiner.
15. 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
Conclusion
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ULARISLAO CORDOVA whose telephone number is (571)272-4690. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 - 5:00 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, Monica Lewis can be reached at (571) 272-1838. 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.
/MONICA LEWIS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2838
/ULARISLAO CORDOVA/Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights