DETAILED ACTION
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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 4, “cover” should be –convert--.. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1,6,8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki et al (6,661,110 from IDS of 7-26-24).
Suzuki discloses a power generator (col.1 lines 21,31) comprising: an engine (not shown, col.1, line 21 “gasoline engine”) configured to provide mechanical energy; a shaft (output of engine) mechanically coupled to the engine to transmit the mechanical energy; an alternator 51 mechanically coupled to the shaft and configured to cover (convert) the mechanical energy into electrical energy; a control panel 101, 310 configured to manage the operation of the engine and the alternator 51; and a power conditioning device 130 disposed between one or more circuit breakers 330 and an outlet 151, 152 of the control panel 101. Gasoline engines of the type known to be connected to a generator either have a crankshaft connected to a rotating shaft or the output of a reduction gearbox in a gas turbine engine connected to a shaft, with even direct connection to a generator being a connection to the shaft of a generator rotor, so the use of a shaft is clearly intrinsic to engine powered generator arrangements.
With regard to claim 6, col. 1 lines 54 and 55 recite a surge limiting circuit 240 to protect the load from voltage surges.
With regard to claim 8, the power conditioning device 130 (inverter) is shown to be hardwired to the other circuit elements of control panel 101.
With regard to claim 9, the Suzuki generator device is said to be portable at col. 1 line 15.
With regard to claim 10, col. 1 line 38 recites the use of the generator as a standby device as needed.
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) 2-4, 7 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki (6,661,110) in view of Cummings (2021/0376613).
Suzuki discloses a power generator (col.1 lines 21,31) comprising: an engine (not shown, col.1, line 21 “gasoline engine”) configured to provide mechanical energy; a shaft (output of engine) mechanically coupled to the engine to transmit the mechanical energy; an alternator 51 mechanically coupled to the shaft and configured to cover (convert) the mechanical energy into electrical energy; a control panel 101, 310 configured to manage the operation of the engine and the alternator 51; and a power conditioning device 130 disposed between one or more circuit breakers 330 and an outlet 151, 152 of the control panel 101.
The device taught by Suzuki differs from the claims by not being said to include an inrush current management system to gradually increase voltage to a load over a predefined period (soft start, claims 2 and 3) and by not including power factor correction (claim 4).
Cummings discloses a microgrid controller having a generator coupled by a shaft to a rotatable flywheel (see Abstract). In paragraph 0107, Cummings recites soft start and inrush current limiting design considerations. In paragraph 0111, Cummings recites power factor correction design considerations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the invention to use the teachings of Suzuki and Cummings to meet the claims because both teachings are related by being small generator systems with complex control arrangements to address variable load and generator performance considerations, with Cummings teaching that it is useful to address inrush current and utilize a soft-start system to address load connection considerations that could damage the load and/or generator during the initial connection phase of power supply operations.
With regard to claim 7, the use of removable power conditioning circuit elements, such as diodes, is a known option to persons of ordinary skill to make the overall system easier to maintain by permitting the replacement of a module instead of replacing a much larger system block during a servicing operation.
With regard to claim 11, an air-conditioning system is one of many load types that could be powered by a stand-by generator of the type taught by either Suzuki or Cummings, because in elevated temperature conditions the operation of the HVAC system can be critical to the health of older persons.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 12-14 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 5 recites additional details of the power factor correction circuit that have not been taught or been fairly suggested by the prior art of record.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN W JACKSON whose telephone number is (571)272-2051. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-3:00.
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, Monica Lewis can be reached at 571-272-1838. 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.
SWJackson
March 18, 2026
/STEPHEN W JACKSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838