DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 9/19/24.
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 .
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.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 13-20 and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to claims 13-20 and 22, it appears that “for a DC-DC converter according to claim” should be “for the DC-DC converter according to claim”.
In regards to claim 19, it appears that “the DC-DC converter comprises isolated and non-isolated type of DC-DC converters” should be “the DC-DC converter comprises an isolated or a non-isolated type of DC-DC converter”.
In regards to claim 22, it appears that “the EMI performance” should be “the desired EMI performance”.
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 12 and 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nishijima (US9673727).
Regarding Claim 12, Nishijima discloses an EMI reduction device (fig. 23) for a DC-DC converter (fig. 22), wherein the DC-DC converter comprises: an input voltage terminal (@4); an output voltage terminal (@term between 23 and 25); a plurality of switching elements (elements of 17 and 8) with an operating frequency (of 17) thereof being adjusted to modulate an output voltage of the DC-DC converter (via OUT to 17); and a control terminal (OUT) which changes the operating frequency of the switching elements based on an output voltage at the output voltage terminal of the DC-DC converter (via FB to 8 and via 34) fig. 10); the EMI reduction device comprises: a frequency modulation input unit which is connected to the control terminal and injects a fluctuation modulation frequency into the operating frequency, wherein the fluctuation modulation frequency is based on the output voltage at the output voltage terminal and is set according to desired EMI performance (col. 5, lines 54-67).
Regarding Claim 18, Nishijima discloses the desired EMI performance is an average value of EMI (col. 6, lines 34-35).
Regarding Claim 19, Nishijima discloses the DC-DC converter comprises an isolated type of DC-DC converter (fig. 22, via T)
Regarding Claim 20, Nishijima discloses the DC-DC converter comprises a quasi-resonant flyback converter (fig. 22).
Regarding Claim 21, Nishijima discloses EMI reduction method for a DC-DC converter (fig. 22), wherein an operating frequency of switching elements of the DC-DC converter is adjusted based on an output voltage of the DC-DC converter via a control terminal (via FB to 8 and via 34) fig. 10), a fluctuation modulation frequency is injected into the operating frequency via the control terminal, and the fluctuation modulation frequency is based on the output voltage and is set according to a desired EMI performance (col. 5, lines 54-67).
Regarding Claim 22, Nishijima discloses a working range in which EMI improvement is required is determined based on the EMI performance of the DC-DC converter, the fluctuation modulation frequency is injected into the switching elements of the DC- DC converter in the working range, in order to obtain the desired EMI performance, and no fluctuation modulation frequency is injected into the switching elements of the DC- DC converter outside the working range (col. 3, lines 24-35, col. 12, lines 58- col. 13, line 50).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection(s) set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
Regarding claim 13, the prior art fails to disclose: “...a fluctuation output voltage detection unit which detects a fluctuation output voltage at the output voltage terminal of the DC-DC converter as a fluctuation feedback voltage; a fluctuation modulation voltage output unit which outputs a fluctuation modulation voltage corresponding to the fluctuation modulation frequency; and a fluctuation error control unit to which a fluctuation error signal of the fluctuation feedback voltage and the fluctuation modulation voltage is input, and which outputs the fluctuation modulation frequency to the control terminal.” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant.
Regarding claim 14, the prior art fails to disclose: “...a fluctuation modulation voltage output unit which outputs a fluctuation modulation voltage corresponding to the fluctuation modulation frequency; the DC-DC converter comprises: an output voltage detection unit which detects the output voltage at the output voltage terminal and outputs an output feedback voltage corresponding to the output voltage; and an error control unit to which an additive value of a constant reference voltage and the fluctuation modulation voltage, as well as the output feedback voltage are input, and which outputs a frequency related to the fluctuation modulation frequency to the control terminal.” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art fails to disclose: “...a current detection unit for detecting an output current of the DC-DC converter, wherein a plurality of current ranges are defined based on the EMI performance of the DC-DC converter, the fluctuation modulation frequency is injected into the switching elements of the DC- DC converter in at least one of the current ranges, and no fluctuation modulation frequency is injected into the switching elements of the DC- DC converter in the current ranges except for the at least one of the current ranges.” in combination with the additionally claimed features, as are claimed by the Applicant.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 9379606, Paul; Rajarshi et al. discloses a discrete narrow-band switching frequency avoidance of a switch mode power converter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE J MOODY whose telephone number is (571)272-5242. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10 AM - 4 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Monica Lewis can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KYLE J MOODY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights