DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the arguments and amendments filed on 8/12/2026.
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
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 39-40 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 39, the limitation “the controlled amount current” lacks proper antecedent basis and should be written as “a controlled amount of current”. Furthermore, it appears that claim 39 should depend from claim 38 instead of claim 36. Dependent claim 40 inherits the deficiencies of claim 39 and is therefore also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 21, 29-34, 36, and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choudhury et al. (US 2024/0039416) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2011/0292688) and Yaqobi et al. (“Low-Voltage Solid-State DC Breaker for Fault Protection Applications in Isolated DC Microgrid Cluster”). Regarding claims 21, 36, and 39, Choudhury et al. discloses (see fig. 1) an electrical power system, comprising: a DC:DC power electronics converter (1) comprising a DC:AC converter circuit (112) having a DC and an AC side (see 112); an AC:DC converter circuit (113) having a DC side and an AC side (see 113); and an AC link (120) connecting the AC side of the DC:AC converter circuit and the AC side of the AC:DC converter circuit (see connection of 120), the AC link including a transformer (see transformer in 120) having a first winding connected to the AC side of the DC:AC converter circuit (120 connection to 112) and a second winding connected to the AC side of the AC:DC converter circuit (120 connection to 113); a DC power source (100) connected to the DC side of the DC:AC converter circuit (see 100 connection); a DC electrical network (101) connected to the DC side of the AC:DC converter circuit (101 connection to 113); and a control system (131) configured to: control a switching operation of a first plurality of transistors of the DC:AC converter circuit (see paragraph 0026) and a second plurality of transistors of the AC:DC converter circuit (see paragraph 0026); monitor one or more operating parameters of the electrical power system (see connection of 131 to sensor outputs of 106, 108, 107, 109). Choudhury et al. does not disclose a control system configured to determine, based on the one or more operating parameters, whether there is a fault in the DC electrical network; and in response to determining there is a fault in the DC electrical network, modify a switching operation of the first plurality of transistors and/or the second plurality of transistors to supply a controlled amount of current from the DC power source to the DC electrical network; and isolate the fault in the DC electrical network by controlling one or more protection devices, wherein the one or more protection devices include at least one of: a mechanical DC contactor, a hybrid relay, or a solid-state circuit breaker. Zhang et al. discloses (see fig. 11) a control system (140) configured to determine, based on one or more operating parameters (140 operation based on outputs from 130A/B), whether there is a fault in a DC electrical network (over/under-voltage or over/under current conditions); and in response to determining there is a fault in the DC electrical network, modify a switching operation of a first plurality of transistors and/or a second plurality of transistors to supply a controlled amount of current from a DC power source to a DC electrical network (operation of 140 controlling the switching operations of SW1-SW7 based on outputs from 130A/B). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Choudhury et al. to include the features of Zhang et al. because it provides for a transient control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Yaqobi et al. discloses (see fig. 5) isolating a fault in a DC electrical network (operation of SSCB) by controlling one or more protection devices (controller controlling the operation of SSCB), wherein the one or more protection devices include at least one of: a mechanical DC contactor, a hybrid relay, or a solid-state circuit breaker (SSCB). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Choudhury et al. to include the features of Yaqobi et al. et al. because it provides for a transient control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 29, Choudhury et al. discloses (see fig. 1) that each DC/AC converter circuit and AC/DC converter circuit are H-bridge circuits (112 and 113 are H-bridge circuits). Regarding claim 30, Choudhury et al. discloses (see fig. 1) that the AC link of the DC:DC converter further comprises a capacitor (C1) connected in series between the AC side of the DC:AC converter circuit and the first winding of the transformer (see series connection between 112 and 120). Regarding claim 31, Choudhury et al. discloses (see fig. 1) a switch arrangement (116) having a first state and a second state (open and closed state), wherein: in the first state, the capacitor is connected in series between the AC side of the DC:AC converter circuit and the first winding of the transformer (116 being open); in the second state, there is a current path between the AC side of the DC:AC converter circuit and the first winding of the transformer that does not include the capacitor (116 being closed); and the control system is further configured to control the state of the switch arrangement (131 controlling the states of 116). Regarding claim 32, Choudhary et al. discloses (see fig. 1) that the switch arrangement is normally in the first state (116 being open) and the control system (131) is configured to switch the switch arrangement from the first state to the second state in response to determining there is a fault (131 closing 113 based on sensor readings). Zhang et al. discloses (see fig. 11) a control system (140) configured to determine, whether there is a fault in a DC electrical network (over/under-voltage or over/under current conditions). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Choudhury et al. to include the features of Zhang et al. because it provides for a transient control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 33, Choudhary et al. discloses (see fig. 1) that the first winding of the transformer has a first number of turns and the second winding of the transformer has a second number (see turns of 120). Choudhary et al. does not disclose that the second number of turns is different from the first number of turns. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system Choudhury et al. to include the features of having the second number of turns be different from the first number of turns, since it has been held that’s discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Choudhury et al. to include the features of having the second number of turns be different from the first number of turns, because it allows for a specific design choice, which can provide a specific/desired type of operation, thus reducing operational variances and increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 34, Choudhury et al. discloses (see fig. 1) that the DC power source is an energy storage system or a second DC electrical network (see 100).
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choudhury et al. (US 2024/0039416) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2011/0292688), Yaqobi et al. (“Low-Voltage Solid-State DC Breaker for Fault Protection Applications in Isolated DC Microgrid Cluster”) and Wang et al. (US Patent 8792253). Regarding claim 35, Choudhury et al. does not disclose an aircraft. Wang et al. discloses (see fig. 1) an aircraft load connected to an electric power distribution system (see column 2 lines 59-65). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the system of Choudhury et al. to include the features of Wang et al., because it allows for a specific design choice, which can provide a specific/desired type of operation, thus reducing operational variances and increasing operational efficiencies.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-28 and 37-38 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.
Claim 40 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JEFFREY A GBLENDE whose telephone number is (571)270-5472. 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, 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.
/JEFFREY A GBLENDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights