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 .
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
This is the first Office action on the merits for Application No. 18/789,368, filed 07/30/2024. Claims 1-10 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) received on 07/30/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "power electronics” in line 4. It is unclear whether these power electronics are the same as the ones introduced in line 2 of the claim or another. This constitutes a double inclusion in the claim. If applicant intends to present the recited arrangement, the Office recommends that the limitation should be amended to recite - -the power electronics- - for clarity.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "An electric vehicle” in line 1. It is unclear whether this electric vehicle is the same one introduced in claim 1 or another. This constitutes a double inclusion in the claim. If applicant intends to present the recited arrangement, the Office recommends that the limitation should be amended to recite - -The electric vehicle- - for clarity.
Claims 8-10 are rejected upon dependent from a rejected claim and they inherit its deficiencies.
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bae et al. (US 2015/0321664 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bae discloses a method for operating a load (fig. 3; paras. [0016] - [0017], [0019], i.e., low voltage electronic loads) having a first voltage (i.e., a low voltage) of an electric vehicle, the method comprising:
operating a traction motor (paras. [0009] - [0010], i.e., first motor 3) of the electric vehicle as a generator that generates the first voltage during travel of the electric vehicle in an emergency operating mode (fig. 3, steps S11-S12; para. [0017], i.e., high voltage main relay of the high voltage battery 10 is off or is abnormally off…the LDC 13 converts the high voltage DC voltage from the high voltage battery 10 and the high direct voltage of regenerative energy of the motors 3 and 4 to charge the low voltage battery 14 with the converted voltage or supply the converted voltage to the low voltage electronic loads);
providing, by power electronics (i.e., low voltage DC to DC converter or LDC 13) having the first voltage connected to the traction motor (paras. [0015] - [0017]),
an operating voltage for the load (fig. 3; paras. [0016] - [0017], [0019], i.e., low voltage electronic loads) having the first voltage (i.e., low voltage) of the electric vehicle; and operating the load (paras. [0016] - [0017] and [0019], i.e., low voltage electronic loads) having the first voltage (i.e., low voltage) in an emergency mode with the operating voltage provided by the power electronics (fig. 3, para. [0020]).
Regarding claim 2, Bae discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: providing, by a battery (10) having a second voltage (i.e., high voltage) that is greater than the first voltage (i.e., low voltage battery 14),
an operating voltage for the traction motor (i.e., first motor 3) of the electric vehicle (para. [0012]);
operating the traction motor (i.e., first motor 3) as a drive machine during travel in a normal operating mode with the operating voltage provided by the battery having the second voltage (fig. 3; para. [0048], i.e., under normal state or operation); and
switching the traction motor (3; paras. [0048] – [0051]) from the normal operating mode to the emergency operating mode if the battery (10) having the second voltage fails during travel (paras. [0016] and [0049], i.e., failure of the high voltage relay 11 of the high voltage battery 10).
Regarding claim 3, Bae discloses the method according to claim 2, further comprising: disconnecting (para. [0019]) the load having the first voltage from the battery (10) having the second voltage (i.e., high voltage); and
connecting the load having the first voltage to the power electronics having the first voltage if the battery having the second voltage (i.e., high voltage) fails while traveling (para. [0017]).
Regarding claim 4, Bae discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: in the emergency operating mode, providing by a battery (i.e., low voltage battery 14) having the first voltage of the electric vehicle,
the operating voltage for the load having the first voltage (i.e., low voltage) when
the operating voltage provided by the traction motor (paras. [0009] - [0010], i.e., first motor 3) in the emergency operating mode drops (para. [0073], i.e., adjust the toque command by actively responding to the step-down of the voltage is interpreted as an operating voltage drops).
Regarding claim 5, Bae discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: limiting a driving speed of the electric vehicle in the emergency operating mode (fig. 3, paras. [0080] and [0089], i.e., limiting torque/speed of the electric motor to prevent deteriorating).
Regarding claim 6, Bae discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the travel of the electric vehicle includes coasting of the electric vehicle (para. [0007]), rolling downhill of the electric vehicle, or the electric vehicle being towed.
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tashiro et al. (US 2012/0306263 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Tashiro discloses a drive system for an electric vehicle, comprising:
power electronics (para. [0049], i.e., current control element, DC-DC converter 10) having a second voltage (i.e., a high voltage or “HV”) that is greater than a first voltage (a low voltage or “LV”);
a traction motor (13) connected to the power electronics; and
power electronics (para. [0049]) having the first voltage (LV) connected to the traction motor (13) and the power electronics having the second voltage (HV).
Regarding claim 9, Tashiro discloses an electric vehicle, comprising: the drive system according to claim 7, a battery (i.e., high voltage battery 11) having the second voltage (HV); and
a load (para. [0049], i.e., auxiliary equipment 8 or 8A/8B) having the first voltage (LV) connected to the power electronics having the first voltage (para. [0070], i.e., a power steering device).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tashiro as applied to claims 7 and 9 above in view of Baba et al. (US 11,065,966 B2).
Regarding claim 8, Tashiro discloses the drive system according to claim 7, but does not specifically teach the motor is an excited synchronous motor.
Baba discloses a similar electric drive for an electric vehicle includes a motor 20 that can be any type of electric drive motors including a synchronous electric motor. Col. 34, lines 32-35.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have substituted a synchronous electric motor taught by Baba for the traction motor of Tashiro because both elements were known equivalents for providing traction force and propelling the vehicle within the motor vehicle art. The substitution would have resulted in the predictable result of providing traction power to propel the vehicle during traveling.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tashiro as applied to claims 7 and 9 above, and further in view of Bartels et al. (US 2025/0115229).
Regarding claim 10, Tashiro discloses the electric vehicle according to claim 9, wherein the load having the first voltage (LV) is a steering system (para. [0070], i.e., a power steering device) of the electric vehicle and/or a brake system (para. [0070], i.e., a braking system) of the electric vehicle but does not specifically teach they are by-wire steering/brake systems.
Bartels discloses a similar electric drive for an electric vehicle includes a steering/brake system that are a steer-by-wire system (para. [0091]) and/or a wet/dry by-wire brake system (paras. [0028] and [0125] – [00127]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have substituted the by-wire steering system or by-wire braking system taught by Bartels for the power braking/steering device of Tashiro because both elements were known equivalents for providing power braking or steering within the motor vehicle art. The substitution would have resulted in the predictable result of providing the power braking to the vehicle drive wheels and/or to the steering of the vehicle that are connected to the low voltage system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yugo (US 8,917,039 B2) discloses a car power source apparatus and vehicle equipped with the power source apparatus includes a motor generator and a converter with high and low voltages, see Figures 1-5;
Makita et al. (US 2009/0206660 A1) discloses a dual power supply system for a vehicle and power supply method includes a generator/starter (31,34) and low voltage loads (32A) and high voltage loads (30A), see Figures 1-15;
Downer et al. (US 2003/0107352 A1) discloses an electrical motor power management system for a hybrid vehicle includes a motor/generator 18, at least one inverter, a low-voltage battery 26 and a high-voltage battery, see Figures 1-2;
Wagner (US 2011/0101774 A1) discloses an emergency energy supply device for a hybrid vehicle includes low and high voltage batteries 207,209,413, and an electric starting motor 221, see Figures 1-4;
Ito et al. (US 7,923,858 B2) discloses an electric power source system and method includes an electric generator 21, a low-voltage system load 50, a high voltage system load 60 and a redundancy object load 51 (i.e., an electrical load) that needs continuous power supply even if a malfunction or a failure should occur in either the low-voltage system electric power source (i.e., including the low-voltage system battery 10 and the electric generator 21) or in the low-voltage system power source line 19, see Figures 1-4 and paragraph [0029]; and
Itoh et al. (US 5,796,175) discloses a power supply control device for electric vehicle includes a motor 2, an inverter 1 and a low voltage 5 and high voltage 4, see Figures 1-5.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tinh T Dang whose telephone number is (571)270-1776. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 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, Ernesto Suarez can be reached at Mon-Friday from 8AM-4:30PM at (571) 270-5565. 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.
/TINH T DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3655 June 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights