DETAILED ACTION
The instant action is in response to application 18 July 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 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 foreign priority based on an application filed in the European Union on 4 August 2023.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered. They are regarded as persuasive to Marent, but not to Heuken. Judging by the remarks there seems to have been a fair bit of confusion about what the obvious modification was.
Heuken explicitly discloses a power converter (Fig. 5), comprising: a converter circuit comprising a first electronic switch (507) and a first inductor (508 primary), the first inductor connected in series with the first electronic switch, the converter circuit configured to convert an input voltage (506) into an output voltage (LED +/-), the output voltage outputted from a first node (513/C7) of the converter circuit to power a load (LEDs), the first node being an output node; a control circuit (501) configured to control operation of the first electronic switch the control circuit comprising a second node (Node trig), the second node being a first input node of the control circuit; and a sense circuit (R11), wherein the sense circuit comprises: i) a first resistor, the first resistor being a sense resistor connected in series with the first electronic switch; ii) a second inductor (509) inductively coupled with the first inductor, and the second inductor coupled (via R8/D9) to the first input node of the control circuit; and iii) a first coupling circuit coupling the sense resistor to the first input node of the control circuit; and circuit, wherein the first coupling circuit comprises a second resistor (R10), the first coupling circuit coupled between the sense resistor and the first input node,
Of all the limitations cited in the new claim, the only thing Heuken does not explicitly disclose is “the first coupling circuit further comprising and a second electronic switch connected in parallel with the second resistor, and wherein the control circuit is further configured to control operation of the second electronic switch.”
This however is obvious. As was stated priorly, placing switches in parallel to resistors to bypass them is old and well known and therefore not patentable. This could be easily achieved by placing a switch in parallel with R10.
The image below shows a power converter, comprising: a converter circuit comprising a first electronic switch and a first inductor, the first inductor connected in series with the first electronic switch, the converter circuit configured to convert an input voltage into an output voltage, the output voltage outputted from a first node of the converter circuit to power a load, the first node being an output node; a control circuit configured to control operation of the first electronic switch the control circuit comprising a second node, the second node being a first input node of the control circuit; and a sense circuit, wherein the sense circuit comprises: i) a first resistor, the first resistor being a sense resistor connected in series with the first electronic switch; ii) a second inductor inductively coupled with the first inductor, and the second inductor coupled to the first input node of the control circuit; and iii) a first coupling circuit coupling the sense resistor to the first input node of the control circuit; and circuit, wherein the first coupling circuit comprises a second resistor, the first coupling circuit coupled between the sense resistor and the first input node, the first coupling circuit further comprising and a second electronic switch connected in parallel with the second resistor, and wherein the control circuit is further configured to control operation of the second electronic switch.
PNG
media_image1.png
489
769
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In this particular case, there are two changes being made: A switch being placed in parallel to R10 and the gate/base/control signal for that switch being fed from the controller. This has the expected advantage of making the current signal easier to sense, which is an expected advantage. As such, it appears that the obviousness rejection of Heuken should be maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 1-16, 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heuken (US 20140218978).
As to claim 1, Heuken explicitly discloses (see image above) explicitly discloses a power converter (Fig. 5), comprising: a converter circuit comprising a first electronic switch (507) and a first inductor (508 primary), the first inductor connected in series with the first electronic switch, the converter circuit configured to convert an input voltage (506) into an output voltage (LED +/-), the output voltage outputted from a first node (513/C7) of the converter circuit to power a load (LEDs), the first node being an output node; a control circuit (501) configured to control operation of the first electronic switch the control circuit comprising a second node (Node trig), the second node being a first input node of the control circuit; and a sense circuit (R11), wherein the sense circuit comprises: i) a first resistor, the first resistor being a sense resistor connected in series with the first electronic switch; ii) a second inductor (509) inductively coupled with the first inductor, and the second inductor coupled (via R8/D9) to the first input node of the control circuit; and iii) a first coupling circuit coupling the sense resistor to the first input node of the control circuit; and circuit, wherein the first coupling circuit comprises a second resistor (R10), the first coupling circuit coupled between the sense resistor and the first input node,
Heuken does not the first coupling circuit further comprising and a second electronic switch connected in parallel with the second resistor, and wherein the control circuit is further configured to control operation of the second electronic switch. However, this is obvious. Bypass transistors are old and well known in the art and therefore not patentable (See MPEP 2144.03 and US 5181170 Fig 1; US 5636288 Fig. 2; US 5930130 Fig. 3C). The advantage would be to feed more current into the power transformer.
As to claim 2, Heuken makes obvious wherein the second inductor is coupled to the first input node via a second coupling circuit (R8, D9(, wherein the second coupling circuit comprises a second resistor (R8) coupled between the second inductor and the first input node.
As to claim 3, Heuken makes obvious wherein the second coupling circuit further comprises a rectifier element (D9) connected in series with the second resistor.
As to claim 5, Heuken makes obvious wherein the converter circuit is implemented as a boost converter (the converter can only raise, decrease, or have the voltage level stay the same. 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 6, Huken makes obvious wherein the converter circuit is implemented as a flyback converter (see image above).
As to claim 7, Heuken makes obvious wherein the control circuit is configured to operate the second electronic switch in an on-state at least during a portion of a time period in which the first electronic switch is in an on-state. Though not explicitly taught, when the power switch is not conducting there would be no reason for the bypass switch not to conduct (See MPEP 2144(I), for scientific principal rational).
As to claim 8, Heuken makes obvious wherein the control circuit is configured to synchronously switch on and off the first and second electronic switches (see explanation for claim 7 above).
As to claim 9, Hueken makes obvious a method, comprising: switching between operating a sense circuit of a power converter in a first operating mode and a second operating mode, wherein the power converter comprises a converter circuit, the converter circuit comprising a first electronic switch and a first inductor connected in series with the first electronic switch, wherein the sense circuit comprises: a sense resistor connected in series with the first electronic switch; a first coupling circuit coupling the sense resistor to a first input node of a control circuit; and a second inductor inductively coupled with the first inductor, the second inductor coupled to the first input node of the control circuit, wherein the first coupling circuit comprises: a first resistor coupled between the sense resistor and the first input node, and a second electronic switch connected in parallel with the first resistor, wherein operating the sense circuit in the first operating mode comprises operating the second electronic switch in an on-state, and wherein operating the sense circuit in the second operating mode comprises operating the second electronic switch in an off-state (this is largely similar to claim 1, with the two states corresponding to conducting and non-conducting of the main and bypass switches. As explained above, the bypass transistors would sync with the main power supply).
As to claim 10, Hueken makes obvious further comprising: operating the first electronic switch in a plurality of drive cycles, each comprising an on-time in which the first electronic switch is in an on-state and an off-time in which the first electronic switch is in an off-state, wherein operating the sense circuit in the first operating mode further comprises operating the sense circuit in the first operating mode at least during a portion of the on-time of the first electronic switch (this would occur with the synchronous switching as explained above, combined with the periodic switching of the main/bypass switches).
As to claim 11, Hueken makes obvious further comprising: monitoring a sense signal received at the first input node of the control circuit at least during a portion of the off-time, and starting a new drive cycle dependent on the monitored sense signal (See Fig. 3. Also note the signal is monitored at all times, not just during the on or off time).
As to claim 12, Hueuken makes obvious further comprising: monitoring a sense signal received at the first input node of the control circuit at least during a portion of the on-time, and switching off the first electronic switch when the sense signal reaches (see Fig. 3) a predefined threshold (see explanation of claim 11 above).
As to claim 13, Heuken makes obvious wherein the control circuit is configured to simultaneously activate the first electronic switch and the second electronic switch during a first mode (this would correspond to having the flyback conduct).
As to claim 14, Heuken makes obvious a third node (R10/R11/507) connecting the first electronic switch and the sense resistor in series; and wherein activation of the second electronic switch during the first mode is operative to convey a first voltage (Vr11) from the third node through the second electronic switch to the first input node of the control circuit, a magnitude of the first voltage indicative of an amount of current passing through the first electronic switch (it is directly proportional to current).
As to claim 15, Heuken makes obvious a second coupling circuit (R8, D9) directly connected between the second inductor and the first input node of the control circuit; wherein the control circuit is configured to deactivate the second electronic switch during a second mode (switches off); wherein the second inductor is operative to generate a second voltage, the second voltage being a magnetizing signal generated by the second inductor (the auxiliary winding generates a magnetized voltage); and wherein the deactivation of the second electronic switch during the second mode is operative to convey the second voltage through the second coupling circuit to the first input node of the control circuit during which the control circuit monitors the second voltage (see image above).
As to claim 16, Heuken makes obvious wherein the second coupling circuit includes a third resistor and a first diode connected in series between the second inductor and the first input node of the control circuit ( see image above).
As to claim 20, Heuken makes obvious wherein the second coupling circuit is operative to provide rectification of the second voltage generated by the second inductor (the diode does this).
As to claim 21, Heuken makes obvious a third node connecting the first electronic switch in series with the first resistor; a second coupling circuit connected in series between the second inductor and the first input node of the control circuit; and wherein the control circuit is operative to control operation of the first coupling circuit to switch between: i) a first mode of monitoring a magnitude of a first voltage supplied from the third node through the first coupling circuit to the first input node, and ii) a second mode of monitoring a magnitude of a second voltage supplied from the second inductor through the second coupling circuit to the first input node (this appears to combine limitations of claims 14, 15, 16 and correspond to whether or not the switches are turned on or off in the modes).
As to claim 22, Heuken makes obvious wherein the control circuit is operative to activate both the first electronic switch and the second electronic switch during the first mode, activation of the second electronic switch in the first mode operative to convey the first voltage from the third node through the first coupling circuit to the first input node; and wherein the control circuit is operative to deactivate the second electronic switch during the second mode, the control circuit operative to monitor a magnitude of the second voltage during the second mode, the magnitude of the second voltage indicating a degree of magnetization of the second inductor (since the gates are fed the same control signal, the two modes correspond to conducting/non-conducting).
Allowable Subject Matter
Please note: while objected or allowed claims have been indicated, only the presented claims have been examined for compliance with form and 35 USC 112 consideration. As a reminder, new claims that are dependent upon objected claims still require examination for form and 35 USC 112 issues even if they overcome 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections. Similarly, amendments incorporating allowable subject matter into independent claims requires reconsideration for dependent claim form and any possible 35 USC 112 issues that arise through amendments even if the 35 USC 102 and 103 rejections are overcome. As such, applicant is advised that while examiner can enter previously allowed claims or previously objected claims rewritten into independent form after final rejection, any other claims may not be entered.
Claims 17-19 would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 17, the prior art fails to disclose: “wherein the second coupling circuit further includes a second diode; and wherein a series circuit path including the second inductor and the third resistor is connected in parallel with the second diode..” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant.
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.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights