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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8, 11-13, 15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being taught by
Vanko et al (PGPUB 2017/0234484).
With respect to claim 1, Vanko teaches a method of braking a brushless DC (BLDC) motor with a
switching array adapted to drive the BLDC motor, comprising:
controlling the switching array according to a commutation scheme (paragraph 0051; 226 uses pwm commutation before switching to braking profile) to decrease a speed (paragraph 0072; trigger release of tool) of the BLDC motor (28); and
when the speed of the BLDC motor is equal to or less than a speed threshold (paragraph 0031),
actuating all high side switching elements or all low side switching elements to cause the BLDC motor to
substantially stop (paragraph 0059).
With respect to claim 2, Vanko teaches further comprising the step of allowing the BLDC motor
to coast (paragraph 0066; 306).
With respect to claim 3, Vanko teaches wherein the steps of controlling the switching array according to the commutation scheme to decrease the speed of the BLDC motor and allowing the BLDC motor to coast are repeated until the speed is equal to or less than the speed threshold (paragraph 0066).
With respect to claim 5, Vanko teaches wherein the step of controlling the switching array according to the commutation scheme to decrease the speed of the BLDC motor is performed for about 1 millisecond to about 1000 milliseconds (paragraph 0063).
With respect to claim 8, Vanko teaches wherein the step of allowing the BLDC motor to coast is
performed for about 1 millisecond to about 1000 milliseconds (paragraph 0063).
With respect to claim 11, Vanko teaches device including a brushless DC (BLDC) motor, the
device comprising:
a controller (208) adapted to: control a switching array (226) according to a commutation scheme to (paragraph 0051; 226 uses pwm commutation before switching to braking profile) drive the BLDC motor to decrease a speed (paragraph 0072; trigger release of tool) of the BLDC motor (28); and
when the speed of the BLDC motor is equal to or less than a speed threshold (paragraph 0031),
actuate all high side switching elements or all low side switching elements to cause the BLDC motor to
substantially stop (paragraph 0059).
With respect to claim 12, Vanko teaches wherein the controller is further adapted to allow the
BLDC motor to coast (paragraph 0066; 306).
With respect to claim 13, Vanko teaches wherein the controller is further adapted to repeatedly
control the switching array according to the commutation scheme to decrease the speed of the BLDC motor and allow the BLDC motor to coast until the speed is equal to or less than the speed threshold (paragraph 0066).
With respect to claim 15, Vanko teaches wherein the controller is adapted to control the
switching array according to the commutation scheme to decrease the speed of the BLDC motor for about 1 millisecond to about 1000 milliseconds (paragraph 0063).
With respect to claim 18, Vanko teaches wherein the controller is adapted to allow the BLDC
motor to coast for about 1 millisecond to about 1000 milliseconds (paragraph 0063).
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) 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 14, 16, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Vanko et al (PGPUB 2017/0234484).
With respect to claims 4 and 12, Vanko does not teach wherein the speed threshold is about 1%
to about 10% of a maximum no load speed of the BLDC motor.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
made to have speed threshold 1-10% of max no load speed, since it has been held that where the
general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges
involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
With respect to claims 6, 9, 16, and 19 Vanko does not teach wherein the controller is adapted
to control the switching array according to the commutation scheme to allow the BLDC motor to coast for about 10 milliseconds.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
made to have motor coast for specific time period (ie 10 milliseconds), since it has been held that
discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re
Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
With respect to claims 7, 10, 17, and 20 Vanko does not teach wherein the controller is adapted
to control the switching array according to the commutation scheme to allow the BLDC motor to coast for about 100 pulse width modulation cycles.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
made to have motor coast for specific number of cycles, since it has been held that discovering an
optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d
272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claims 1, and 11, Applicant again lays out the different braking profiles of the Vanko reference and then says that Vanko does not disclose the steps of, “controlling the switching array according to a commutation scheme to decrease a speed of the BLDC motor”. Then applicant states that Vanko merely activating the three high or low side switches, not controlling a switching array. The power switch circuit 226 of Vanko, containing six semiconductor switches/ ie inverter (paragraph 0050), a switching array. This is what is exactly is claimed and changing the switching circuit 226 of Venko from pwm switching operation (paragraph 0051) to braking profile (paragraph 0031). Changing the direction of flow of current through motor through/by way of the switching circuit/inverter is the definition of commutation scheme.
Then applicant states that Vanko does not disclose the steps of, “when the speed of the BLDC motor is equal to or less than a speed threshold actuating all high side switching elements or all low side switching elements to cause the BLDC motor to substantially stop” and that Vanko discloses the control unit 208 for transistions. Vanko teaches changing switching when speed falls below predetermined threshold (paragraph 0031). It is known that control unit sends signal from gate drive to the switching circuit 226 and switching pattern changes happen in switching circuit of Vanko. There is nothing present in the currently independent claim language to differentiate over the Prior Art of Vanko.
Conclusion
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