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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-17 are pending. Claims 4-6, 8-9, and 11-12 are currently amended.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09 August 2024 was filed before the mailing date of the first Office Action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 5 be found allowable, claim 11 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 2-4 and 15 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 3 is rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of rejected base claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 4, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 15, the phrase "preferable" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 1-2, 4-8, 11-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollmer (US 20210249982 A1) in view of Haj-Maharsi (US 20190067986 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Hollmer teaches a launch system for an amusement vehicle ride, said launch system comprising:
a Direct Current, DC, bus having a DC bus voltage (48) Fig. 1;
a power input (50) arranged to be connected to an Alternating Current, AC, power grid (40);
an auxiliary power supply (76) connected to said DC bus for providing said DC bus voltage (as seen in Fig. 1) and comprising a plurality of battery cells (82) arranged to provide at least 150 kilowatt (para. [0078], line 1, “megawatt range”);
a DC/AC converter (60, 62, 64) having an input connected to said DC bus (as seen in Fig. 1) and an output arranged to be connected to one or more motors (12, 14, 16) for driving said amusement vehicle ride (22, 24, 26), said DC/AC converter arranged for converting said DC power to an AC power for providing said AC power to said one or more motors (para. [0070]),
a controller (90) for controlling said DC/AC converter,
wherein the launch system further comprises
a
receiving AC power via said power input (40), and for converting said AC power to a Direct Current, DC, power, and for providing said DC power to said DC bus (para. [0068]), and for
Hollmer does not teach the rectifier being a bidirectional rectifier arranged for receiving DC power from via said DC bus, and for converting said DC power to said AC power for injecting said AC power into said AC power grid.
Haj-Maharsi teaches a bidirectional rectifier (214) (Fig. 1) arranged for receiving DC power from said DC bus, and for converting said DC Power to said AC power (para. [0026], lines 4-8) for injecting said AC power into said AC power grid (para. [0031], lines 13-15).
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 the rectifier of Hollmer to include a bi-directional rectifier arranged for converting DC power into AC power and injecting said AC Power into the grid as taught by Haj-Marshal with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the reliability of the system (see Haj-Maharsi, para. [0031], lines 13-21).
In regards to claim 2, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 1, wherein each of said plurality of battery cells are arranged for discharging with at least six times
Hollmer does not explicitly teach wherein each of said plurality of battery cells are arranged for discharging with at least four times its rated capacity.
However, Hollmer does teach over-dimensioning the battery reservoir to discharge the energy needed power the launch system (para. [0018]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the each of said plurality of battery cells are arranged for discharging with at least four times its rated capacity with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of utilizing a robust and more easily manageable technology (para. [0016]) without costing performance, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP § 2144.05 (II)(A).
In regards to claim 4, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 1, wherein a capacity of said plurality of battery cells is at
Hollmer does not explicitly teach wherein the capacity of said plurality of battery cells is at least 5 times the energy provided during one launch of said amusement vehicle ride.
However, Hollmer does teach at least two successive launches without charging (para. [0053]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the plurality of battery cells having a capacity at least 5 times the energy provided during one launch of said amusement vehicle ride with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the amount of launches that can be performed between charging, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP § 2144.05 (II)(A).
In regards to claim 5, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 1, wherein said launch system further comprises
While Hollmer does not explicitly teach a converter located in-between said plurality of battery cells and said DC bus.
Haj-Maharsi teaches a converter (216) located in-between said plurality of battery cells (208) and said DC bus (204).
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 the rectifier of Hollmer to include a converter located in-between said plurality of battery cells and said DC bus as taught by Haj-Marshal with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the redundancy of the system (see Haj-Maharsi, para. [0031], lines 13-21).
In regards to claim 6, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 1, wherein said plurality of battery cells are arranged in multiple parallel strings of batteries (Hollmer, as seen in Fig. 1).
In regards to claim 7, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 6, wherein said auxiliary power supply comprises an Auxiliary Management System (98) (Hollmer, Fig. 1) for controlling individual connections of each of said strings to said DC bus (Hollmer, para. [0092].
In regards to claim 8, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 1, wherein said launch system further comprises an AC switch (79) (Hollmer, Fig. 1) for connecting, and disconnecting, said AC power grid (40) to said power input (50) (Hollmer, as seen in Fig. 1).
In regards to claim 11, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 1, wherein said launch system further comprises
While Hollmer does not explicitly teach a converter located in-between said plurality of battery cells and said DC bus.
Haj-Maharsi teaches a converter (216) located in-between said plurality of battery cells (208) and said DC bus (204).
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 the rectifier of Hollmer to include a converter located in-between said plurality of battery cells and said DC bus as taught by Haj-Marshal with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the redundancy of the system (see Haj-Maharsi, para. [0031], lines 13-21).
In regards to claim 12, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 1, wherein the launch system is incorporated into an amusement vehicle ride (Hollmer, para. [0022]), the amusement vehicle ride comprising one or more motors for driving said amusement vehicle ride (para. [0070]).
In regards to claim 13, Hollmer teaches a method of operating a launch system in accordance with claim 1, wherein said method comprises the steps of:
providing, by said auxiliary power supply (76), said DC bus voltage, and
providing (para. [0068]), by said auxiliary power supply, said DC power to said DC/AC converter (60, 62, 64) for powering (para. [0070]) said one or more motors (12, 14, 16), and
Hollmer does not teach converting said DC power to said AC power for injecting said AC power into said AC power grid.
Haj-Maharsi teaches converting said DC Power to said AC power (para. [0026], lines 4-8) for injecting said AC power into said AC power grid (para. [0031], lines 13-15).
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 the rectifier of Hollmer to include converting DC power into AC power and injecting said AC Power into the grid as taught by Haj-Marshal with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the reliability of the system (see Haj-Maharsi, para. [0031], lines 13-21).
In regards to claim 14, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a method in accordance with claim 13, wherein said method comprises the step of:
controlling, by said controller, said DC/AC converter such that it is providing said AC power during launch of said amusement vehicle ride (Hollmer, para. [0078]).
In regards to claim 15, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a method in accordance with claim 14, wherein a duration of said launch of said amusement vehicle ride is between 2 - 10 seconds (Hollmer, para. [0023]), preferable between 3 - 6 seconds.
In regards to claim 16, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a method in accordance with claim 13, wherein said controller is further arranged for controlling said rectifier, and wherein said method comprises the step of:
controlling, by said controller, said rectifier such that said DC voltage is controlled between 500 volt DC and 1200 volt DC (Hollmer, para. [0096]).
In regards to claim 17, Hollmer teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored thereon (90) (Fig. 1) which, when executed by a launch system cause said launch system to operate according to a method in accordance with claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollmer (US 20210249982 A1) in view of Haj-Maharsi (US 20190067986 A1) and Marzano (US 20150091478 A1).
In regards to claim 3, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 2, wherein said plurality of battery cells are arranged to provide a discharge current for at
Hollmer does not explicitly teach wherein said plurality of battery cells are arranged to provided a discharge current for at least 80,000 times.
Marzano teaches providing a discharge current for at least 80,000 times (para. [0031]).
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 the launch system of Hollmer to include a providing a discharge current for at least 80,000 times as taught by Marzano with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the reliability of the system since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP § 2144.05 (II)(A).
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollmer (US 20210249982 A1) in view of Haj-Maharsi (US 20190067986 A1) and Mu (US 20200304026 A1).
In regards to claim 9, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 1, wherein said launch system further comprises:
Hollmer does not explicitly teach an additional power supply for providing additional DC supply power; and an additional DC/DC converter for converting the additional DC supply power to DC power, and for providing said DC power to said DC bus.
Mu teaches an additional power supply for providing additional DC supply power (134) (Fig. 1); and an additional DC/DC converter for converting the additional DC supply power to DC power (para. [0021]), and for providing said DC power to said DC bus (para. [0021]).
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 the launch system of Hollmer to include an additional power supply and converter as taught by Mu with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of increasing the redundancy of the system and reducing time required to charge the batteries since it has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(B).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hollmer (US 20210249982 A1) in view of Haj-Maharsi (US 20190067986 A1), Mu (US 20200304026 A1), and Weston (US 20190312435 A1).
In regards to claim 10, the combination of Hollmer as modified by Haj-Maharsi and Mu above teaches a launch system in accordance with claim 9, wherein said additional power supply is any of:
Hollmer does not explicitly teach wherein the launch system can be additionally powered by a solar or wind power system.
Weston teaches providing power utilizing solar or wind power systems (as seen in Fig. 2) to a launch system (para. [0001], “amusement rides”).
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 the launch system of Hollmer to include utilizing wind or solar power as taught by Weston with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of utilizing regenerative and renewable energy (para. [0004]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Inoue (US 20230115683 A1) discloses a power conversion device.
Kuznetsov (US 20210075217 A1) discloses a hybrid energy storage modules for pulsed power effectors.
Kuznetsov (US 20160197600 A1) discloses a method and apparatus for control of pulsed power in hybrid energy storage module.
Vidts (DE 102013112431 A1) discloses an arrangement of power plant with a battery.
Apalenek (CA 2779888 A1) discloses a hybrid electric generator set.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES WILLIAM JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-7063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 11am-7pm.
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, Samuel Morano can be reached at (571) 272-6684. 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.
/JAMES WILLIAM JONES/ Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights