DETAILED ACTION
The instant action is in response to application 11 June 2024.
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 .
Specification
The specification is objected to for the following informalities:
The title is not descriptive. Examiner suggests: Totem Pole Power Factor Correction Device and Current Spike Reduction Method.
The 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.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for priority to 11 June 2024..
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 7, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
As to claim 7, applicant claims that “the duty cycle increases over each respective transition zone”. The problem is there is no upper bound as worded. As a simple example to make the math easier, assume a 1% increase per zero crossing. Given the sinusoidal nature, there are generally two zero crossings per period which would lead to a duty cycle above 100% in under one second for a sixty hertz system, and just over a second for a 50Hz system. This claim language needs to further limit this value such that a duty cycle does not exceed 100%. For the purposes of examination, it will be assumed that applicant meant “wherein the predetermined transition duty cycle increases over one or more cycles”.
Claim 17 has a similar issue to claim 7 and is indefinite for similar reasons. It shall be interpreted in the same way.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
For method claims, 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 will inherently perform 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. (The claims have been condensed.)
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.
Claims 1, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Ye (US 20220271651).
As to claim 1, Ye discloses A totem pole power factor correction device comprising: a low frequency leg comprising first and second low frequency switches (Fig. 2, Q3/Q4); a high frequency leg comprising first and second high frequency switches (Fig. 2, Q1/Q2); an alternating current (AC) voltage input (Fig. 2 AC) comprising a first leg electrically connected between the first and second low frequency switches and a second leg electrically connected between the first and second high frequency switches, the AC voltage input adapted to receive an AC input voltage to be converted to a direct current (DC) output voltage V(out); and a controller (item generating gate signals for MOSFETs Q1-Q4) connected to and configured to control the first and second low frequency switches and the first and second high frequency switches; wherein, during each of a plurality of transition zones, each transition zone starting before and ending after a respective zero crossing of the AC input voltage, the controller is configured to (see image below) (i) hold open the first and second low frequency switches and one of the first and second high frequency switches and (ii) close and open a different one of the first and second high frequency switches according to a predetermined transition duty cycle (¶57 “and control the first transistor Q1 to be turned on and off at the targeted switching frequency after the AC voltage Vac crosses zero. The turn-on duty cycle of Q1 increases linearly”) to provide a gradual transition of a midpoint voltage of the low frequency leg from its maximum value to zero volts or from zero volts to its maximum value (both Ye and applicant have an AC source directly tied to the AC leg, so the midpoint follows that voltage); and wherein, between transition zones, the controller is configured to control the closing and opening of the first and second low frequency switches and the first and second high frequency switches according to a predetermined operating duty cycle for each of the first and second low frequency switches and the first and second high frequency switches to provide power factor correction.
PNG
media_image1.png
404
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 6, Ye discloses wherein the predetermined duty cycle is variable.
As to claim 7, Ye discloses wherein the predetermined transition duty cycle increases over reach respective transition zone (Fig. 6).
As to claim 8, Ye discloses wherein each of the first and second low frequency switches and the first and second high frequency switches comprise one or more switching transistors.
As to claim 10, Ye discloses wherein each of the first and second low frequency switches comprise one or more diodes (mosfets have body diodes).
As to claims 11, 16, 17, 18, 20 these are method claims that correspond to apparatus claims 1, 6, 7, 8, 10 and are anticipated per MPEP 2112.02.
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 of this title, 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 2, 3, 5, 12, 13, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (US 20220271651) in view of Sun’s “How to reduce current Spikes at AC zero crossing for totem-pole PFC” (TI NPL).
As to claim 2, Ye teaches during each transition zone when the AC input voltage is transitioning from a positive voltage to a negative voltage, the controller is configured to hold open the second high frequency switch and to close and open the first high frequency switch according to the predetermined transition duty cycle (Fig. 3).
Though heavily implied by symmetry, Ye does not explicitly teach during each transition zone when the AC input voltage is transitioning from a negative voltage to a positive voltage, the controller is configured to hold open the first high frequency switch and to close and open the second high frequency switch according to the predetermined transition duty cycle; and wherein.
Sun teaches during each transition zone when the AC input voltage is transitioning from a negative voltage to a positive voltage, the controller is configured to hold open the first high frequency switch and to close and open the second high frequency switch according to the predetermined transition duty cycle; and wherein, during each transition zone when the AC input voltage is transitioning from a positive voltage to a negative voltage, the controller is configured to hold open the second high frequency switch and to close and open the first high frequency switch according to the predetermined transition duty cycle (Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device above to account for both positive to negative and negative to positive current spikes.
As to claim 3, Ye teaches during each transition zone when the AC input voltage is transitioning from a positive voltage to a negative voltage, the midpoint voltage of the low frequency leg gradually transitions from zero to its maximum value (Fig. 5).
Though implied by symmetry, he does not explicitly teach during each transition zone when the AC input voltage is transitioning from a negative voltage to a positive voltage, the midpoint voltage of the low frequency leg gradually transitions from its maximum value to zero; and wherein.
Sun teaches wherein, during each transition zone when the AC input voltage is transitioning from a negative voltage to a positive voltage, the midpoint voltage of the low frequency leg gradually transitions from its maximum value to zero; and wherein, during each transition zone when the AC input voltage is transitioning from a positive voltage to a negative voltage, the midpoint voltage of the low frequency leg gradually transitions from zero to its maximum value (Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device above to account for both positive to negative and negative to positive current spikes.
.As to claim 5, Ye does not teach wherein the predetermined transition cycle is fixed.
Sun teaches wherein the predetermined transition cycle is fixed (pg. 25 “a special sequence and each executes a soft-start mechanism”, Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device above to use a fixed duty cycle during the soft-start period in order to simplify the control.
As to claims 12, 13, 15 these are method claims that correspond to apparatus claims 2, 3, 5 and are anticipated per MPEP 2112.02.
Claims 4, 9, 14, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (US 20220271651)
As to claim 4, Ye does not explicitly teach wherein the predetermined transition duty cycle is less than ten percent. However, this is obvious. The duty cycle can only be greater than, less than, or equal to ten percent. It has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.__, __, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
As to claim 9, Ye does not explicitly teach wherein each of the first and second low frequency switches comprise one or more thyristors. However, this is obvious. According to §MPEP 2144.03, examiner asserts that changing switching devices from one type of well-known switch to another also well known to one of ordinary skill in the art. See US Patent 5,568,368 Col. 2, lines 35-45. Also see US Patent Application Publication 2009/0059623A1 ¶0030, US Patent 6,271,605 B1 Col. 5, lines 40-46.
As to claims 14, 19 these are method claims that correspond to apparatus claims 4, 9 and are obvious per MPEP 2112.02.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular column, paragraph, 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 figures 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 or disclosed by the Examiner. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER M NOVAK whose telephone number is (571)270-1375. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM,Monday through Thursday, EST.
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, Crystal Hammond can be reached on 571-270-1682. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PETER M NOVAK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2839