DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the following communications: Application filed on 06/18/2024.
Claims 1-6 are presented for Examination. Claims 1 and 6 are independent.
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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a series of mathematical steps (calculating differences, comparing to a threshold, adjusting variables) without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1:
Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Step 1:
Claim 1 recites “a control device”, thus it is a product, one of the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter.
Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 1:
Claim 1 recites the steps of:
“detects current of each of (N−1) phases other than an intermediate phase among currents of the N phases when a phase to which (N+1)/2-th largest voltage is applied at a current detection time among voltages applied to the N phases is defined as the intermediate phase” and “a calculation unit that calculates a current value of current of the intermediate phase based on a detection result of the current detection unit”: This involves a human calculating via pen and paper for an 3 phase motor, thus this is a mental process.
“a current detection unit”: This involves a human detect a current and determine the value. Hence, this is a mental process.
Claim 1 therefore recites abstract ideas.
Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 2:
Claim 1 recites the additional elements:
“a current detection unit”: This element does not integrate the abstract ideas from Step 2A Prong 1 into a practical application because it is an insignificant extra solution activity of value calculation using an unit or block (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Thus, claim 1 is directed to the abstract ideas.
Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Step 2B:
The additional elements in claim 1 do not provide significantly more than the abstract ideas themselves, taken alone and in combination because:
“a current detection unit”: This element mentions the concept of “receiving data” (MPEP § 2106.05(d)(I), Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec, 838 F.3d 1307, 1321; 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2016) [utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information]) which is well understood routine and conventional.
Since there is no nexus between the additional elements that could cause the combination to provide an inventive concept, claim 1 is subject-matter ineligible.
Regarding claim 6:
Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Step 1:
Claim 6 recites “a control method”, thus it is a process, one of the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter.
Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 1:
Claim 6 recites the steps of:
“a current detection step of detecting current of each of (N−1) phases other than an intermediate phase among currents of the N phases when a phase to which (N+1)/2-th largest voltage is applied at a current detection time among voltages applied to the N phases is defined as the intermediate phase” and “a calculation step of calculating a current value of current of the intermediate phase based on a detection result of the current detection step”: This involves a human reading a current of a 3 phase motor and calculating a current value , thus this is a mental process.
“a current detection unit”: This involves a human reading a current and determine the value. Hence, this is a mental process.
Claim 6 therefore recites abstract ideas.
Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Step 2A Prong 2:
Claim 6 recites the additional elements:
“a current detection unit”: This element does not integrate the abstract ideas from Step 2A Prong 1 into a practical application because it is an insignificant extra solution activity of value reading using a unit or black box (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Thus, claim 6 is directed to the abstract ideas.
Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Step 2B:
The additional elements in claim 6 do not provide significantly more than the abstract ideas themselves, taken alone and in combination because:
“a current detection unit”: This element mentions the concept of “reading data” (MPEP § 2106.05(d)(I), Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec, 838 F.3d 1307, 1321; 120 USPQ2d 1353, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2016) [utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information]) which is well understood routine and conventional.
Since there is no nexus between the additional elements that could cause the combination to provide an inventive concept, claim 6 is subject-matter ineligible.
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)(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.
Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Z. Li et al (Z. Li et al., "A Fast Diagnosis Method for Both IGBT Faults and Current Sensor Faults in Grid-Tied Three-Phase Inverters With Two Current Sensors," in IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 5267-5278, May 2020, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2019.2946692.).
Regarding independent claim 1, Zhan Li et al disclose that a control device (Fig.1) that controls an N-phase inverter that applies voltage to each of N phases when N is an odd number of three or more (Fig.1, A,B,C phases), the control device comprising:
a current detection unit (Fig.1:CSa) that detects current of each of (N−1) phases other than an intermediate phase among currents of the N phases when a phase to which (N+1)/2-th largest voltage is applied at a current detection time among voltages applied to the N phases is defined as the intermediate phase; and
a calculation unit that calculates a current value of current of the intermediate phase based on a detection result of the current detection unit (Section IV).
Regarding claim 2, Zhan Li et al disclose that wherein the N is “3”, and the N phases are three phases (Fig.1,A,B,C).
Regarding claim 3, Zhan Li et al disclose that wherein
the current detection unit includes a first detector and a second detector (Fig.1:CSa,CSb),
the first detector detects current of a maximum phase among currents of the three phases when a phase to which largest voltage among voltages applied to the three phases is applied at the current detection time is set as the maximum phase, and
the second detector detects current of a minimum phase among currents of the three phases when a phase to which smallest voltage among voltages applied to the three phases is applied at the current detection time is set as the minimum phase (Fig.6 at time t4).
Regarding independent claim 6, Zhan Li et al disclose that a control method executed by a control device (Fig.1) that controls an N-phase inverter that applies voltage to each of N phases when N is an odd number of three or more(Fig.1, A,B,C phases), the control method comprising:
a current detection(Fig.1:CSa) step of detecting current of each of (N−1) phases other than an intermediate phase among currents of the N phases when a phase to which (N+1)/2-th largest voltage is applied at a current detection time among voltages applied to the N phases is defined as the intermediate phase; and
a calculation step of calculating a current value of current of the intermediate phase based on a detection result of the current detection step (Section IV).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 6 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD S ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8439. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am to 6:00pm.
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 on 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.
/MUHAMMAD S ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846
Prosecution Insights