Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/728,941

METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A DRIVE SYSTEM OF A RAIL VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 15, 2024
Examiner
MEHARI, YEMANE
Art Unit
2838
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Siemens Mobility GmbH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
813 granted / 909 resolved
+21.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
929
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
54.1%
+14.1% vs TC avg
§102
36.4%
-3.6% vs TC avg
§112
4.3%
-35.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 909 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 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. This office action is in response to the application filed on 07/15/2024. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawing The drawings filed on 07/15/2024 are acceptable. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS/s) submitted on 07/15/2024 and 07/19/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 1.97. Accordingly, the IDSs have been considered by the examiner. The applicant has canceled claims 1-9. Claims 10-19 are pending and have been examined. Claim Objection Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: It appears that on line 2 of the claim “drive system containing” should be “drive system comprising”. Appropriate correction is required. Specification Objection The Specification has been objected to for failing to present the specification as required by the format presented below. Appropriate correction is required. The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use. Arrangement of the Specification As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading: (a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION. (b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS. (c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT. (d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. (e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM. (f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. (g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION. (1) Field of the Invention. (2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. (h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION. (i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S). (j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION. (k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet). (l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet). (m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system. Drawings Objection The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The power semiconductor switches claimed on claims 10, 13, 14, 16 and 18 are not labeled by an identifier character on figures 3 and 4. The identifier characters for the power semiconductor switches must be shown on the figures or the limitations canceled from the claims. No new matter should be added Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered, and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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. Claims 10-14, 15, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kumar (US 2006/0012320 A1). In re to claim 14, Kumar discloses a drive system of a rail vehicle (i.e. 1302, fig. 13, see para. [0054]) the drive system comprising: a DC link circuit (i.e. the DC link 122, see par. [0174]) having at least one DC link capacitor at which a DC link voltage is present during operation of the drive system (i.e. the ultracapacitor, fig. 2, see par. [0042]); a power converter (i.e. 1326, see par. [0085]) connected to said DC link circuit (i.e. 122) and containing a plurality of power semiconductor switches (i.e. 1104, fig. 11, see par. [0174]); a drive motor connected to said power converter and configured as a permanent magnet excited three-phase synchronous machine (i.e. 208, fig. 13, see par. [0084]); a controller (i.e. 1120, fig. 11) for controlling said power semiconductor switches (i.e. 1104]) of said power converter (i.e. see par. [0171]), wherein, when said drive motor is in a motor mode and a generator mode (i.e. see the Abstract and see pars. [0065, 0124]), said power semiconductor switches (i.e. [1104]) are controlled by said controller (i.e. [1120]) such that the DC link voltage is converted into a polyphase AC voltage (i.e. see par. [0172]); and when said drive motor is in a zero-torque idling mode (i.e. see pars. [0068, 0078, 0177]), said controller being configured to suspend control of said power semiconductor switches depending on a voltage induced in said power converter by said drive motor (i.e. see paras. [0121, 0132]). In re to claim 15, Kumar discloses the drive system (i.e. 1302, fig. 13, see para. [0054]) according to claim 14, wherein said drive motor (i.e. 208, fig. 13, see par. [0084]); is configured to reduce the voltage induced during the zero-torque idling mode using at least one means within said drive motor (i.e. see pars. [0067-0068]). In re to claim 18, Kumar discloses A rail vehicle (i.e. 300, fig. 3, see par. [0056]), comprising: at least one said drive system, containing: a DC link circuit (i.e. the DC link 122, see par. [0174]) having at least one DC link capacitor at which a DC link voltage is present during operation of the drive system (i.e. the ultracapacitor, fig. 2, see par. [0042]); a power converter (i.e. 1326, see par. [0085]) connected to said DC link circuit (i.e. 122) and containing a plurality of power semiconductor switches (i.e. 1104, fig. 11, see par. [0174]); a drive motor connected to said power converter and configured as a permanent magnet excited three-phase synchronous machine (i.e. 208, fig. 13, see par. [0084]); a controller (i.e. 1120, fig. 11) for controlling said power semiconductor switches (i.e. 1104]) of said power converter (i.e. see par. [0171]), wherein, when said drive motor is in a motor mode and a generator mode (i.e. see the Abstract and see pars. [0065, 0124]), said power semiconductor switches (i.e. [1104]) are controlled by said controller (i.e. [1120]) such that the DC link voltage is converted into a polyphase AC voltage (i.e. see par. [0172]); and when said drive motor is in a zero-torque idling mode (i.e. see pars. [0068, 0078, 0177]), said controller being configured to suspend control of said power semiconductor switches depending on a voltage induced in said power converter by said drive motor (i.e. see paras. [0121, 0132]). 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. Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar (US 2006/0012320 A1) in view of Shinomiya et al. (EP 3985863 A1), hereinafter, Shinomiya’. In re to claims 16-17, Kumar discloses the drive system (i.e. 1302, fig. 13, see para. [0054]) according to claim 14. Except, Perreault fail to explicitly disclose that wherein said power semiconductor switches are based on a semiconductor material having a larger band gap than silicon; wherein said semiconductor material is selected from the group consisting of silicon carbide, gallium nitride and diamond. Whereas Shinomiya teach that wherein said power semiconductor switches are based on a semiconductor material having a larger band gap than silicon; wherein said semiconductor material is selected from the group consisting of silicon carbide, gallium nitride and diamond (i.e. power semiconductor elements in which SiC (silicon carbide) or GaN (gallium nitride is used, see par. [0019]). 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 drive system of Kumar by incorporating the SiC or GaN of Shinomiya to help minimize system losses; allow higher voltage, temperature, and frequency operation. In re to claims 10-13 and 19, method claims 10-13 and 19 are rejected based on the following case law, note that under MPEP 2112.02, the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device inherently performs the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed Cir. 1986). Therefore, the previous rejections based on the apparatus will not be repeated. Remarks The examiner has cited columns, line numbers, paragraph numbers, references, or figures in the references applied to the claims below 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 figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses to fully consider the reference in entirety, as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2141.02 and § 2123. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEMANE MEHARI whose telephone number is (571)270-7603. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM TO 6 PM. 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, Thienvu V. Tran can be reached at 5712701276. 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. /YEMANE MEHARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 15, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603580
POWER CONVERSION APPARATUS AND POWER CONVERSION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597851
DISTRIBUTED CONTROL DEVICE AND DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587089
FREQUENCY TUNED RESISTOR-INDUCTOR-CAPACITOR SNUBBER FOR SWITCHING POWER SUPPLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12573951
ELECTRONIC DEVICE COMPRISING BOOST CIRCUIT, AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING SAME ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562639
POWER ELECTRONICS CONVERTER THERMAL MANAGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+6.2%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 909 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month