FDETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to the Applicant filing on 8.27.26. Claims 1-8 are pending and have been examined.
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 .
Response to Arguments and Amendments
The Applicant has made minor amendments to dependents claim 5,8 which will be examined below and previous claim objection relative to claim 5 is withdrawn.
With respect to 35 U.S.C 102 and 103 rejections, the Applicant provides several arguments to which the Examiner will respond accordingly:
Applicant Argument 1: However, Scott explains that the indicia of zero crossings generated by the zero crossing detector are utilized to derive the relative phases of the respective windings of groups. In addition, Scott explains that the operative low side power switch (2706 or 2708) is rendered nonconductive slightly after (at time T1 as a zero crossing point of voltage) the operative high side power switch circuit (2702 or 2704), to accommodate lagging currents caused by highly inductive loads such as motors.
Examiner Response 1: Although Examiner does not agree or disagree with above, the above argument is moot as the functional aspects of the switching element is not recited in the claims. Examiner is unable to read argument into the claims.
Applicant Argument 2: The invention discussed by Scott (hereinafter, "Cited Invention") addresses a problem that, when a significantly inductive load, such as an induction motor of the type found in many home electric appliances, is connected, the current wave form tends to lag the voltage wave form, so that the portion of the lagging current wave form occurring after time T1, corresponding to a zero crossing in the voltage wave form, is effectively lost, and the torque generated by the induction motor is decreased.
Examiner Response 2: Although Examiner does not agree or disagree with above, the above argument is moot as Examiner Office action is based on claim recitation.
Applicant Argument 3: In the Cited Invention, lagging currents caused by such inductive loads are accommodated by providing a path for the current flow occurring after the zero-crossing points in the voltage wave form. That is to say, the low side power switch circuit (2706 or 2708) is maintained conductive for a predetermined period (e.g., 3/32nds of the half cycle of the output signal) after the operative high side power switch circuit (2702 or 2704) is turned off at time T1 of a zero crossing point, thereby the current path through the low side power switch circuit (2706 or 2708) is maintained for an additional period of time, resulting in a continued flow of current after time T1, even if the current path to the high side output terminal is broken, creating dead time in the voltage wave form.
Examiner Response 3: It is not clear which part of claim mapping in Office action is being argued, therefore argument is not relevant. Office Action shows claim mapping of instant claim recitation to prior art Scott.
Applicant Argument 4: In contrast, the problem to be solved by the present invention is to realize a reduction in electromagnetic resistance that occurs to prevent rotation of a rotor (electromagnetic braking that occurs in a direction opposite to a rotational direction of the rotor due to flowing of an induced current in the coils) (please paragraph [0008] of this specification as originally filed). The present invention addresses a different problem from that of the Cited Invention in the first place.
Examiner Response 4: Claim recitation says “control unit that controls the first switching element to be turned off in a first period that is at least a part of a period in which electromagnetic resistance in a direction opposite to a rotational direction of the rotor occurs due to flowing of the induced current…”.There is no recitation of reduction in electromagnetic resistance, further Examiner has explained in Office Action that electromagnetic resistance due to back emf (Lenz’ laws) are natural in a generator.
Applicant Argument 5: In the case of the present invention, in order to solve the problem mentioned above, "the first switching element [is] turned off in a first period that is at least a part of a period in which electromagnetic resistance in a direction opposite to a rotational direction of the rotor occurs due to flowing of the induced current." A rotational position of the rotor is detected to identify the "period in which electromagnetic resistance occurs." As in the embodiment shown as an example in the following drawing, the present invention relates to detecting a rotational position of the rotor to identify the periods T2, T4 in which electromagnetic resistance occurs, rather than detecting a rotational position for zero crossing.
Examiner Response 5: Fig 5 discloses control circuit 22 which has input from zero crossing sensor 512 and Fig 28 is a control strategy as shown in previous office action specifically “a control unit (22) that controls the first switching element (2702,2708) to be turned off in a first period (Fig 28, 2802) that is at least a part of a period (Fig 28 time period includes periods where electromagnetic resistance due to back emf and Fig 28 discloses a creation of a sinusoidal wave similar to Applicant Fig 6c using a cylindrical rotor stator configuration similar to Applicant ) in which electromagnetic resistance in a direction opposite to a rotational direction of the rotor occurs due to flowing of the induced current and controls the first switching element to be turned on (Fig 30) in a period other than the first period (Col 45, Line 61-63 discloses either turned or turned off, therefore time periods are not overlapping) on the basis of a rotational position of the rotor (Fig 28 is based on zero crossing which is measured by rotor position) which is detected by the rotational position detection unit (512) [Col45, lines 53-60 discloses generation of a desired sine wave by selectively actuating and deactuating power switch circuits 2702-2708]”.
Applicant Argument 6: Although Scott discloses that the high side power switch circuit (2702 or 2704) is turned off at time T1 when a zero crossing is detected, Scott does not disclose therein to turn off a switching element in a first period as in the present invention. In addition, Scott discloses that the low side power switch circuit (2706 or 2708) is maintained ON in a predetermined period from time T1 when a zero crossing is detected; however, this is the control of a switch circuit that is different from the turned-off high side power switch circuit (2702 or 2704), and differs from the ON-control of the first switching element in the present invention.
Examiner Response 6: As shown in previous Office action, Examiner has interpreted in Fig 28, 2802 as first time period. W.r.t rest of argument, Examiner has mapped instant claim specifically “…and controls the first switching element to be turned on (Fig 30) in a period other than the first period (Col 45, Line 61-63 discloses either turned or turned off, therefore time periods are not overlapping) on the basis of a rotational position of the rotor (Fig 28 is based on zero crossing which is measured by rotor position)…” . It is not clear which part of claim mapping is being argued.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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 1-4,6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Scott et al (US5886504A), hereinafter Scott.
Regarding Claim 1, Scott discloses (Figs 1-2,5,27-28,30) a power generator (20,18) that is provided with a cylindrical rotor (20) including a plurality of permanent magnets (204), and a cylindrical stator (18) that includes a plurality of coils (400) and is arranged concentrically (Fig 2) with the rotor, and generates a voltage by rotating the rotor(this is inherent to generator), comprising:
a rotational position detection unit (512 is zero crossing detector) that detects a rotational position of the rotor;
a first switching element (2702,2708) provided on a first path (2703-2702-L1, L2-2708-2707) through which an induced current generated in the coils flows in correspondence with a variation in a distance between the permanent magnet and the coils(This is inherent in a generator such as in Fig 2 where current and voltage are a function of rate of change of magnetic flux which in turn depends upon the approach and departure of rotor magnets relative to coils); and
a control unit (22) that controls the first switching element (2702,2708) to be turned off in a first period (Fig 28, 2802) that is at least a part of a period (Fig 28 time period includes periods where electromagnetic resistance due to back emf and Fig 28 discloses a creation of a sinusoidal wave similar to Applicant Fig 6c using a cylindrical rotor stator configuration similar to Applicant ) in which electromagnetic resistance in a direction opposite to a rotational direction of the rotor occurs due to flowing of the induced current and controls the first switching element to be turned on (Fig 30) in a period other than the first period (Col 45, Line 61-63 discloses either turned or turned off, therefore time periods are not overlapping) on the basis of a rotational position of the rotor (Fig 28 is based on zero crossing which is measured by rotor position) which is detected by the rotational position detection unit (512) [Col45, lines 53-60 discloses generation of a desired sine wave by selectively actuating and deactuating power switch circuits 2702-2708].
PNG
media_image1.png
444
542
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
538
708
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
518
828
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
460
682
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
646
572
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
378
498
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Scott discloses the power generator according to claim 1. Scott further discloses comprising: a second switching element (2704,2706) provided on a second path (2703-2704-L2, L1-2706-2707) for causing a current to flow through the coil in a direction opposite to a direction in which the induced current flows, wherein the control unit controls the second switching element to be turned (Col 45, Line 61-63) on in a second period (Fig 28, another 2802) that is at least a part of the first period (Second 2802 duration T2 to T3 is at least equal to a portion of 0 to T1 in Fig 28 ) in which the first switching element is turned off, and controls the second switching element to be turned off in a period other than (0 to T2) the second period (T2-T3).
Regarding Claim 3, Scott discloses the power generator according to claim 2. Scott further discloses wherein the first switching element (2702,2708) and the second switching element (2704,2706) form an H-bridge circuit (Fig 27 arrangement is H-bridge).
Regarding Claim 4, Scott discloses the power generator according to claim 1. Scott further discloses wherein the control unit (22) monitors whether the rotor has reached a steady state of constant speed rotation [Col 50, Lines 18-46] on the basis of detection result signals sequentially output from the rotational position detection unit in correspondence with rotation of the rotor, and controls on/off of the switching elements after detecting that the steady state has been reached [Col 50, Lines 18-46 discloses throttle control 3908 to maintain engine speed as indicated by ZEROX which is rotational position detection].
Regarding Claim 6, Scott discloses the power generator according to claim 2. Scott further discloses wherein the control unit (22) monitors whether the rotor has reached a steady state of constant speed rotation [Col 50, Lines 18-46] on the basis of detection result signals sequentially output from the rotational position detection unit in correspondence with rotation of the rotor, and controls on/off of the switching elements after detecting that the steady state has been reached [Col 50, Lines 18-46 discloses throttle control 3908 to maintain engine speed as indicated by ZEROX which is rotational position detection].
Regarding Claim 7, Scott discloses the power generator according to claim 3. Scott further discloses wherein the control unit (22) monitors whether the rotor has reached a steady state of constant speed rotation [Col 50, Lines 18-46] on the basis of detection result signals sequentially output from the rotational position detection unit in correspondence with rotation of the rotor, and controls on/off of the switching elements after detecting that the steady state has been reached [Col 50, Lines 18-46 discloses throttle control 3908 to maintain engine speed as indicated by ZEROX which is rotational position detection].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5,8 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 “A power generation system, comprising:the power generator according to claim 2 or 3;a prime mover that applies a rotational driving force to the rotor;a battery that applies an operating power source for the prime mover; a charge and discharge changeover switch that switches charge or discharge of the battery; and a second control unit that controls the charge and discharge changeover switch to be switched from a discharge side to a charge side in a case where a current flowing back through the second switching element occurs in the second period so as to charge the battery by the flowing back current”. Scott recites power generator system (Fig 1) with power generator (18,20) , a prime mover (14) that applies a rotational driving force to the rotor (20) and charge and discharge mechanism for the capacitive circuit 2710 in Col 43 Lines 5 to30 but does not explicitly disclose charge and discharge of battery with switching mechanism during a current flowback in the second period. Therefore claim 5 is allowable. Claim 8 has similar limitations as Claim 5, therefore is allowable.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISWANATHAN SUBRAMANIAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached at 5712723560. 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.
/VISWANATHAN SUBRAMANIAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
