DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is in response to the application filed on 4/28/26.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
3. Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I (figures 1-2 and 7-8, claims 1-11,15-18, 20, and 22-23) in the reply filed on 4/28/26 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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)(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.
5. Claims 1-3, 15, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Peng et al. (US 11817788).
Regarding claim 1: Peng et al. disclose (i.e. figures 1 and 4-9) a power conversion circuit (i.e. 30) converting an input voltage (i.e. V1) into an output voltage (i.e. output of circuit 30), comprising:
a resonant capacitor (i.e. C1), coupled (i.e. electrically coupled) between a resonant node (i.e. node connecting C1 and N1) and a ground (i.e. ground);
a transformer (i.e. transformer of 30), comprising a primary coil (i.e. M1) and a secondary coil (i.e. M2), wherein the primary coil (i.e. M1) is coupled (i.e. electrically coupled) between a switch node (i.e. node between Q1, Q2) and the resonant node (i.e. node connecting C1 and N1);
a high-side transistor (i.e. Q1), providing the input voltage (i.e. V1) to the switch node (i.e. node between Q1, Q2) based on a high-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q1);
a low-side transistor (i.e. Q2), coupling the switch node (i.e. node between Q1, Q2) to the ground (i.e. ground) based on a low-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q2);
a control circuit (i.e. 50, 60, 40), operating in either a flyback mode (i.e. half bridge mode) or a resonant mode (i.e. full bridge mode) to generate the high-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q1) and the low-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q2); and
a rectifying circuit (i.e. rectifier of 30), converting energy of the secondary coil (i.e. M2) into the output voltage (i.e. output of circuit 30);
wherein when the control circuit (i.e. 50, 60, 40) operates in the resonant mode (i.e. full bridge mode), the rectifying circuit (i.e. rectifier of 30) full- wave rectifies the energy of the secondary coil (i.e. M2) to generate the output voltage (i.e. output of circuit 30);
wherein when the control circuit (i.e. 50, 60, 40) operates in the flyback mode (i.e. half bridge mode), the rectifying circuit (i.e. rectifier of 30) half- wave rectifies the energy of the secondary coil (i.e. M2) to generate the output voltage (i.e. Col. 6, lines 14 through Col. 8).
Regarding claim 2: (i.e. figures 1 and 4-9) wherein when the control circuit (i.e. 50, 60, 40) operates in the resonant mode (i.e. full bridge mode), the control circuit (i.e. 50, 60, 40) adjusts a voltage level of the output voltage (i.e. output of circuit 30) by using a switching frequency (i.e. frequency of drive signal) of the high-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q1) and the low-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q2); wherein when the control circuit (i.e. 50, 60, 40) operates in the resonant mode (i.e. full bridge mode), a duty cycle (i.e. cycle of drive signal) of the high- side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q1) and the low-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q2) is close to 50% (i.e. any duty cycle pulse) (i.e. Col. 6, lines 14 through Col. 8).
Regarding claim 3: (i.e. figures 1 and 4-9) wherein when the control circuit (i.e. 50, 60, 40) operates in the flyback mode (i.e. half bridge mode), the control circuit (i.e. 50, 60, 40) adjusts a voltage level of the output voltage (i.e. output of circuit 30) by using a duty cycle (i.e. duty cycle of driving signal) of the high-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q2).
Regarding claims 15 and 22: The method steps will be met during the normal operation of the apparatus described above. (Examiner notes: 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).
Regarding claim 23: (i.e. figures 1 and 4-9) the secondary coil (i.e. M2) comprises a first terminal, a second terminal, and a common terminal; wherein the rectifying circuit (i.e. rectifier of 30) comprises a first rectifying unit (i.e. Q3) coupled (i.e. electrically coupled) between the first terminal and the ground, a second rectifying unit (i.e. Q4) coupled (i.e. electrically coupled) to the second terminal, and a rectifying switch (i.e. Q5) coupling (i.e. electrically coupled) the second rectifying unit (i.e. Q4) to the ground;
wherein when the energy of the second coil (i.e. M2) is full-wave rectified to generate the output voltage (i.e. output of 30), the rectifying switch (i.e. figure 7: Q5) is turned on;
wherein when the energy of the second coil (i.e. M2) is half-wave rectified to generate the output voltage (i.e. output of 30), the rectifying switch (i.e. figure 4: Q5) is turned off (i.e. Col. 6, lines 14 through Col. 8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng et al. (US 11817788) in view of Wittenbreder (US 6147886).
Regarding claim 4: Peng et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the output voltage is equal to a product of the duty cycle of the high-side driving signal, a turns ratio of the transformer, and the input voltage; wherein the turns ratio is equal to a number of turns of the secondary coil to a number of turns of the primary coil.
However, Peng et al. disclose (i.e. figures 1 and 4-9) the output voltage (i.e. output of circuit 30); the duty cycle of the high-side driving signal (i.e. duty cycle of Sw1 to drive Q1), a turns ratio of the transformer (i.e. transformer of 30), and the input voltage (i.e. Vin); wherein the turns ratio is equal to a number of turns of the secondary coil (i.e. M2) to a number of turns of the primary coil (i.e. M2),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to combine all the variables that are provided to calculate the output voltage is equal to a product of the duty cycle of the high-side driving signal, a turns ratio of the transformer, and the input voltage; wherein the turns ratio is equal to a number of turns of the secondary coil to a number of turns of the primary coil, because the converter capable of flexibly adjusting output voltage value according to the demand voltage of an electronic device. Since, it is very well known in the art to do so in order to calculate the output voltage using the given variable.
In addition, Wittenbreder discloses the output voltage (i.e. Vout) is equal to a product of the duty cycle (i.e. D) of the high-side driving signal, a turns ratio of the transformer, and the input voltage (i.e. Vin); wherein the turns ratio (i.e. Nsec/Npri) is equal to a number of turns of the secondary coil to a number of turns of the primary coil (i.e. see Col. 13 and equation 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Peng et al.’s invention with the equation as disclose by Wittenbreder to accomplish higher efficiency of the converter.
8. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peng et al. (US 11817788) in view of Kikuchi (US 20180006569).
Regarding claim 5: Peng et al. disclose (i.e. figures 1 and 4-98) a secondary control circuit (i.e. circuit for controlling secondary side and 70), generate the feedback signal (i.e. SV) and generating a mode signal (i.e. SF2); wherein the control circuit (i.e. circuit for controlling secondary side and 70) generates the high-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q1) and the low-side driving signal (i.e. Sw1 for Q2) based on the feedback signal (i.e. VV); wherein the rectifying circuit (i.e. rectifier of 30) full-wave or half-wave rectifies (i.e. half bridge mode) (i.e. full bridge mode) the energy of the secondary coil (i.e. M2) based on the mode signal (i.e. Sf2),
but does not specifically disclose comparing the output voltage to a reference voltage.
Kikuchi discloses a power supply (i.e. figure 6) comprising comparing (i.e. 314) the output voltage (i.e. Vout) to a reference voltage (i.e. Vth).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Peng et al.’s invention with the power supply as disclose by Kikuchi to comparing the output voltage to a reference voltage to generate the feedback signal and generating a mode signal, because it maintains the target voltage require by the power supply.
Allowable Subject Matter
9. Claims 6-11, 16-17, 18, 20 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.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1269. The examiner can normally be reached Flex: M-F 8-7.
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.
/Nguyen Tran/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights