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 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.
(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.
Claims 10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being participated by Nakahori (US 2009/0168461).
Regarding claim 10, Nakahori teaches a battery pack (see figures 1 and 2) comprising: a triple-active bridge DC-DC converter (see figure 1) having a transformer (fig. 1@ [31, 32]), the transformer including a magnetic core (see figure 2 and par. [0009]), a first winding (fig. 1@ 311) on a first side of the transformer (31, 32) having a predetermined number of turns (see figures 1 and 2), wound around one leg of the core (see figure 2) and a second winding (fig. 1@ 321) on the first side of the transformer (31, 32) having the same number of turns wound around a second leg of the core (see figures 1 and 2), a first bridge (fig. 1@ [S11-S14]) for inverting a DC input to produce an AC output electrically connected with the first winding (311), (the bridge [S11-S14] converting a DC input to produce an AC output), a second bridge (fig. 1@ [S21-S24]) for inverting the DC input to produce an AC output electrically connected with the second winding (321), (the bridge [S21-S24] converting a DC input to produce an AC output), and a third winding (fig. 1@ [312, 322]) on a second side of the transformer (31, 32) electrically connected to an input side of a third bridge (fig. 1@ 41, 42) for rectifying an AC current to provide a DC output (see par. [0045-0046] and figure 1: the rectifier circuits 41 and 42 for rectifying an AC current to provide a DC output); and a battery (fig. 1@ a high-voltage battery 10) having an output electrically connected to an input of each of the first and second bridges ([S11-S14] and [S21-S24]) on the first side of the transformer (see figure 1).
Regarding claim 12, further Nakahori teaches an energy storage system comprising a plurality of battery packs arranged in series (see figure 1 and par. [0037] and [0047]).
Regarding claim 13, further Nakahori teaches wherein the first bridge on the first side of the transformer is a full-bridge and the second bridge on the first side of the transformer is a half-bridge (see par. [0100]).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakahori (US 2009/0168461) in view of Kawai et al. (US 12,308,761).
Regarding claim 1, Nakahori teaches a battery pack (see figures 1 and 2) comprising: a triple-active bridge DC-DC converter (see figure 1) having a transformer (fig. 1@ [31, 32]), first and second bridges (fig. 1@ [S11-S14 and S21-24]) on a first side of the transformer (see figure 1), and a rectifier (fig. 1@ [41, 42])on a second side of the transformer (see figure 1), wherein at least one of the two bridges (S11-S14 and S21-24 [DC/AC converters]) is a fractional bridge (see figure 1); a first battery (fig. 1@ high-voltage battery 10) electrically connected in parallel with each of the first and second bridges (S11-S14 and S21-24) on the first side of the transformer (see figure 1); and a second battery (see figure 1 and par. [0037], “supplies the output voltage to a not-shown low-voltage battery to drive a load 6”) electrically connected with the rectifier (41, 42) on the second side of the transformer (see figure 1).
However, Nakahori does not explicitly teach a full-bridge on the second side of the transformer.
Kawai teaches a full-bridge (fig. 2@ [Q5a-Q8a] or [Q5b-Q8b]) on a second side of the transformer (see figure 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakahori with the teachings of Kawai by having a full-bridge on the second side of the transformer in order to allows for higher power, better efficiency (due to zero-voltage switching), lower voltage stress on switches (equal to input voltage), and simpler transformer design, making it ideal for high-power applications like servers or EVs by handling larger voltage/current swings and reducing EMI/losses compared to half-bridge designs.
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches wherein the magnetic flux at a magnetic core of the transformer is asymmetric (see Abstract and figure 2; Nakahori).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches wherein two-thirds of the total magnetic flux on the first side of the bridge is induced by the first bridge on the first side of the transformer and one-third is induced by the second bridge on the first side of the transformer (see Abstract and figure 2; Nakahori).
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches wherein the first bridge on the first side of the transformer is a full-bridge and the second bridge on the first side of the transformer is a half-bridge (see par. [0100]; Nakahori).
Claims 2-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakahori (US 2009/0168461) in view of Kawai et al. (US 12,308,761) and further in view of Langbauer et al. (EP4422043).
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the battery pack, but does not teaches wherein each bridge on the primary side of the triple-active bridge includes a capacitor and an inductor in series with a transformer inductive winding.
Langbauer teaches wherein each bridge on the primary side of the triple-active bridge includes a capacitor (fig. 2@ C1) and an inductor (fig. 2@ L1) in series with a transformer (fig. 2@ T) inductive winding (see figure 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakahori and Kawai with the teachings of Langbauer by having wherein the bridge on the primary side of the triple-active bridge includes a capacitor and an inductor in series with a transformer inductive winding in order to reducing switching losses and thermal stress on components, the overall converter efficiency is increased, especially in high-power and high-frequency applications.
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches an energy storage system comprising a plurality of battery packs of claim 2 arranged in series (see figure 1 and par. [0037] and [0047]; Nakahori).
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches a process for operating the triple-active bridge DC-DC converter of claim 2 as a double-active bridge DC-DC converter, comprising maintaining switching elements in the full bridge in selected static states such that the full bridge effectively functions as a half-bridge (see par. [0100]; Nakahori).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakahori (US 2009/0168461) in view of Kawai et al. (US 12,308,761) and further in view of Wittenbreder (US 2006/0062026).
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches wherein the first bridge on the first side of the transformer is a full-bridge (see par. [0100]) and the second bridge on the first side of the transformer (see figure 1; Nakahori).
However, the combination does not explicitly teach the second bridge is a quarter-bridge.
Wittenbreder teaches the bridge is a quarter-bridge (see figure 8 and par. [0083], “FIG. 8 illustrates a quarter bridge primary switching network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakahori and Kawai with the teachings of Wittenbreder by having the bridge is a quarter-bridge in order to reduces the voltage stress on the primary winding network to one quarter of the line voltage and simultaneously reduces the voltage stress applied to each of the primary switches to one half of the line voltage.
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches wherein the first bridge on the first side of the transformer is a half-bridge (see par. [0100]) and the second bridge on the first side of the transformer (see figure 1; Nakahori).
However, the combination does not explicitly teach the second bridge is a quarter-bridge.
Wittenbreder teaches the bridge is a quarter-bridge (see figure 8 and par. [0083], “FIG. 8 illustrates a quarter bridge primary switching network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakahori and Kawai with the teachings of Wittenbreder by having the bridge is a quarter-bridge in order to reduces the voltage stress on the primary winding network to one quarter of the line voltage and simultaneously reduces the voltage stress applied to each of the primary switches to one half of the line voltage.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakahori (US 2009/0168461) in view of Langbauer et al. (EP4422043).
Regarding claim 11, Nakahori teaches the battery pack, but does not explicitly teach wherein each bridge on the primary side of the triple-active bridge includes a capacitor and an inductor in series with a transformer inductive winding.
Langbauer teaches wherein each bridge on the primary side of the triple-active bridge includes a capacitor (fig. 2@ C1) and an inductor (fig. 2@ L1) in series with a transformer (fig. 2@ T) inductive winding (see figure 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakahori with the teachings of Langbauer by having wherein the bridge on the primary side of the triple-active bridge includes a capacitor and an inductor in series with a transformer inductive winding in order to reducing switching losses and thermal stress on components, the overall converter efficiency is increased, especially in high-power and high-frequency applications.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakahori (US 2009/0168461) in view of Wittenbreder (US 2006/0062026).
Regarding claim 14, Nakahori teaches wherein the first bridge on the first side of the transformer is a full-bridge (see par. [0100]) and the second bridge on the first side of the transformer (see figure 1).
However, Nakahori does not explicitly teach the second bridge is a quarter-bridge.
Wittenbreder teaches the bridge is a quarter-bridge (see figure 8 and par. [0083], “FIG. 8 illustrates a quarter bridge primary switching network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakahori with the teachings of Wittenbreder by having the bridge is a quarter-bridge in order to reduces the voltage stress on the primary winding network to one quarter of the line voltage and simultaneously reduces the voltage stress applied to each of the primary switches to one half of the line voltage.
Regarding claim 15, Nakahori teaches wherein the first bridge on the first side of the transformer is a half-bridge (see par. [0100]) and the second bridge on the first side of the transformer (see figure 1).
However, Nakahori does not explicitly teach the second bridge is a quarter-bridge.
Wittenbreder teaches the bridge is a quarter-bridge (see figure 8 and par. [0083], “FIG. 8 illustrates a quarter bridge primary switching network”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakahori with the teachings of Wittenbreder by having the bridge is a quarter-bridge in order to reduces the voltage stress on the primary winding network to one quarter of the line voltage and simultaneously reduces the voltage stress applied to each of the primary switches to one half of the line voltage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUAN LY whose telephone number is (571)272-9885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7492. 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.
/XUAN LY/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/DANIEL CAVALLARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836