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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to
www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 9, 10, 12-17, 21 and 22 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 14, 4, 12, 14, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19 of U.S. Publication No. 2025/0007437 A1, respectively. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they can be interpreted to describe substantially identical or very similar a gate drive system with essentially the same relationship. Regarding claims 1, 9, 10, 12-17, 21 and 22 of instant application, see comparison with claims 1, 4, 14, 4, 12, 14, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19 of US Publication No. 2025/0007437 A1, respectively. Differences between the respective claims are underlined.
Instant application 18/902,464
U.S. Publication No. 2025/0007437 A1
Claim 1, An inverter for driving an electric machine,
the inverter having
a power converter circuit, a safety control device and a power supply circuit for supplying the power converter circuit and the safety control device,
wherein the safety control device is configured to switch the power converter circuit to a safe state when a shutdown situation is present,
wherein the power supply circuit has a high-voltage branch, a first low-voltage branch and a second low-voltage branch,
wherein the high-voltage branch is electrically connected to the first low-voltage branch via an operating DC-DC converter,
wherein neither the high-voltage branch nor the first low-voltage branch is electrically connected to the second low-voltage branch,
wherein the power converter circuit and the safety control device are supplied with energy from the first low-voltage branch and the second low-voltage branch.
Claim 9. The inverter according to claim 1, wherein the operating DC-DC converter can be disconnected from the first low-voltage branch by means of a first safety disconnector.
Claim 10. The inverter according to claim 9, wherein the first safety disconnector comprises at least one electronic switch between an input and an output and a control circuit, wherein the control circuit is configured to open or close the at least one electronic switch in accordance with a control signal.
Claim 12. The inverter according to claim 1, wherein the operating DC-DC converter can be disconnected from the high-voltage branch by means of a high-voltage disconnector.
Claim 13. The inverter according to claim 1, wherein the second low-voltage branch can be disconnected from an external power supply by means of a third safety disconnector.
Claim 14. The inverter according to claim 13, wherein the third safety disconnector comprises at least one electronic switch between an input and an output and a control circuit, wherein the control circuit is configured to open or close the at least one electronic switch in accordance with a control signal.
Claim 15. The inverter according to claim 13, wherein the safety control device is configured to detect the presence of a shutdown situation when the third safety disconnector is in a non-conductive state.
Claim 16. The Inverter according to claim 1, wherein the safety control device comprises at least two safety logic circuits, wherein a first of the at least two safety logic circuits is supplied or can be supplied with energy from the first low-voltage branch and a second of the at least two safety logic circuits is supplied or can be supplied with energy from the second low-voltage branch.
Claim 17. A method of operating the inverter according to claim 1, comprising: in the presence of a shutdown situation, bringing the power converter circuit into a safe state.
Claim 21. The method according to claim 17, comprising: detecting that a shutdown situation is present when a fault occurs in the operating DC/DC converter.
Claim 22, the method according to claim 17, comprising: detecting that a shutdown situation is present when a gate driver circuit detects a fault, in particular in the power supply from the first low-voltage branch and/or the second low-voltage branch.
Claim 1. An inverter for controlling an electrical machine, the inverter having
a high-voltage branch, a low-voltage branch and a backup supply branch,
an operating DC/DC converter, which is connected on the one hand to the high-voltage branch and on the other hand to the low-voltage branch,
a backup supply DC/DC converter, which is connected on the one hand to the low-voltage branch and on the other hand to the backup supply branch,
an inverter circuit for connecting the high-voltage branch to AC voltage terminals for the electrical machine,
the inverter circuit and a safety control device being supplied with energy from the low-voltage branch, the safety control device being set up to switch the inverter circuit to a safe state when a shutdown situation occurs,
wherein the inverter circuit and the safety control device are supplied or can be supplied with energy from the backup supply branch.
Claim 4. The inverter according claim 1, wherein the operating DC/DC converter is disconnectable from the low-voltage branch by means of a first safety disconnector and/or is disconnectable from the high-voltage branch by means of a first high-voltage disconnector.
Claim 14. The inverter according to claim 12, wherein at least one of the first, second, third and fourth safety disconnectors comprises at least one electronic switch between an input and an output and a control circuit, wherein the control circuit is arranged to open or close the at least one electronic switch in accordance with a control signal.
Claim 4. The inverter according claim 1, wherein the operating DC/DC converter is disconnectable from the low-voltage branch by means of a first safety disconnector and/or is disconnectable from the high-voltage branch by means of a first high-voltage disconnector.
Claim 12. The inverter according to claim 1, wherein the supply branch is disconnectable from the mains branch and/or the backup supply branch by means of a fourth safety disconnector.
Claim 14. The inverter according to claim 12, wherein at least one of the first, second, third and fourth safety disconnectors comprises at least one electronic switch between an input and an output and a control circuit, wherein the control circuit is arranged to open or close the at least one electronic switch in accordance with a control signal.
Claim 13. The inverter according to claim 12, wherein the safety control device is adapted to detect the occurrence of a shutdown situation when at least one of the first, second, third and fourth safety disconnectors is in a non-conductive state
Claim 15. The inverter according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the safety control device and the inverter circuit comprises at least two safety logic circuits, wherein a first of the at least two safety logic circuits is supplied or can be supplied with energy from the low-voltage branch and a second of the at least two safety logic circuits is supplied or can be supplied with energy from the backup supply branch.
Claim 16. A method of operating an inverter according to claim 1, comprising: in the occurrence of a shutdown situation, bringing the inverter circuit into a safe state.
Claim 18. The method according to claim 16, comprising: detecting that a shutdown situation exists when a fault occurs in the operating DC/DC converter and/or the backup supply DC/DC converter.
Claim 19. The method according to claim 16, comprising: detecting that a shutdown situation occurs when the at least one gate driver circuit for the high-side and low-side semiconductor switches detects a fault, in particular in the power supply from the low-voltage branch.
Note: some claims of instant application are not exactly limitations as U.S. Publication No. 2025/0007437 A1. However, they are the same functions. Therefore, these limitations are obvious by system of U.S. Publication No. 2025/0007437 A1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea (e.g. mental processes and/or human activity) without significantly more.
For claim 17, the limitation “in the presence of a shutdown situation” could be based on observation from a human (i.e. human activity) and determine a shutdown situation has occurred by mental process, and the limitation "bringing the power converter circuit into a safe state" could be a planning on how to bring the power converter circuit into certain operation mode by mental process.
Additional element, such as "an inverter" and "the power converter circuit" are merely post-solution activity to perform the abstract tasks; however, these additional elements are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the courts have held that utilizing well-known and conventional tool to perform abstract tasks do not supply "significantly more". Accordingly, the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Thus, the claim(s) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
For claims 18-22, the claims further "detecting that a shutdown situation is present when the first safety disconnector detects a fault" in different components of the inverter. The additional elements "the operating DC/DC converter", "safety disconnectors", “two power supply circuits”, “an external power supply” and “a gate driver circuit” are merely post-solution activity to perform the abstract tasks; however, these additional elements are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the courts have held that utilizing well-known and conventional tool to perform abstract tasks do not supply "significantly more". Accordingly, the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Thus, the claims 18-22are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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.
Claims 1-7 and 9-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikuyama et al. (hereinafter Ikuyama, US 2024/0424916 A1) in view of Hirakata (US 2023/0020544 A1).
For claim 1, Ikuyama discloses an inverter for driving an electric machine (Fig. 1 of Ikuyama discloses an inverter 100 for driving an electric machine 900 – see Ikuyama, Fig. 1, paragraph [0029], lines 1-5), the inverter having a power converter circuit, a safety control device (Fig. 1 of Ikuyama discloses a motor control circuit 110 comprising an auxiliary power supply circuit 111, and safety control device 112 which altogether constitute a control device – see Ikuyama, Fig. 1, paragraph [0035], lines 1-2) and a power supply circuit for supplying the power converter circuit and the safety control device (Fig. 1 of Ikuyama discloses the inverter 100 having a power converter circuit 300, a safety control device 112 and a power supply circuit 10, 901 for supplying the power converter circuit 300 and the safety control device – see Ikuyama, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0029] and [0035]),
wherein the safety control device is configured to switch the power converter circuit to a safe state when a shutdown situation is present (Fig. 1 of Ikuyama discloses the safety control device 112 which is configured to switch the power converter circuit 300 to a safe state when a shutdown situation is present – see Ikuyama, Fig. 1, paragraph [0041]),
wherein the power supply circuit has a high-voltage branch, a first low-voltage branch and a second low-voltage branch (Figs. 1-2 of Ikuyama disclose the power supply circuit has a high-voltage branch connected to the DC power supply 901, a first low-voltage branch connected to backup winding circuit 208U/208L and a second low-voltage branch connected to the DC power supply 10 – see Ikuyama, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [0029], [0035] and [0050]),
wherein the power converter circuit and the safety control device are supplied with energy from the first low-voltage branch and the second low-voltage branch (Figs. 1-2 of Ikuyama disclose the power converter circuit 300 and the safety control device 112 which are supplied with energy from the first low-voltage branch connected to backup winding circuit 208U/208L and the second low-voltage branch connected to the DC power supply 10 – see Ikuyama, Figs. 1-2, paragraphs [0032], [0035] and [0050]).
Ikuyama discloses the high-voltage branch which is not electrically connected to the first low-voltage branch via an operating DC-DC converter, wherein neither the high-voltage branch nor the first low-voltage branch is electrically connected to the second low-voltage branch.
Hirakata discloses an inverter which is similar as Ikuyama for driving an electric machine (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses an inverter 1,6, 201 having a power converter circuit 4, a safety control device 30, and a power supply circuit 1, 21, 22 -- see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0030] and [0033]-[0034]). Hirakata discloses the power supply circuit which has a high-voltage branch, a first low-voltage branch and a second low-voltage branch, wherein the high-voltage branch which is electrically connected to the first low-voltage branch via an operating DC-DC converter, wherein neither the high-voltage branch nor the first low-voltage branch is electrically connected to the second low-voltage branch (the power supply circuit 1, 21,22 which has a high-voltage branch 1, a first low-voltage branch 22 and a second low-voltage branch 21, wherein the high-voltage branch 1 which is electrically connected to the first low-voltage branch 22 via an operating DC-DC converter 15, wherein neither the high-voltage branch 1 nor the first low-voltage branch 22 is electrically connected to the second low-voltage branch 21 – see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0027], [0033] and [0035]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Ikuyama to incorporate teaching of Hirakata for purpose of supplying safety critical inverter circuitry from independent power sources so that loss or failure of one of power source does not prevent execution of the inverter safety function.
For claim 2, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 1, wherein the safety control device comprises at least two power supply circuits, a first one of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the first low-voltage branch and a second one of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the second low-voltage branch (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses the safety control device 30 which comprises at least two power supply circuits 21, 22, a first one of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the first low-voltage branch 22 and a second one of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the second low-voltage branch 21 – see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0033] and [0036]).
For claim 3, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 1. wherein the power converter circuit comprising at least two power supply circuit, a first power supply circuit of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the first low-voltage branch and a second power supply circuit of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the second low-voltage branch (Figs. 1 and 13 of Hirakata discloses the power converter circuit 4/62 comprising at least two power supply circuit (51, 52) and 54, a first power supply circuit (1, 15)/(51, 52) of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the first low-voltage branch 22 and a second power supply circuit 6 of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the second low-voltage branch 21 – see Hirakata, Figs. 1 and 13, paragraphs [0005]-[0006] and [0033]-[0034]).
For claim 4, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 3, wherein the first power supply circuit of the at least two power supply circuits can be disconnected from the first low-voltage branch by means of a second safety disconnector (Figs. 1 and 13 of Hirakata disclose the first power supply circuit 1, 15/51, 52 of the at least two power supply circuits can be disconnected from the first low-voltage branch 22 by means of a second safety disconnector 32 – see Hirakata, Figs. 1 and 13, paragraphs [0034] and [0044]-[0045]).
For claim 5, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 4, wherein the second safety disconnector comprises at least one electronic switch between an input and an output and a control circuit, wherein the control circuit is configured to open or close the at least one electronic switch in accordance with a control signal (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses the second safety disconnector 32 comprises at least one electronic switch 32 between an input and an output and a control circuit 33, wherein the control circuit 33 is configured to open or close the at least one electronic switch 32 in accordance with a control signal – see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraph [0043]-[0046]).
For claim 6, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 4, wherein the safety control device is configured to detect the presence of a shutdown situation when second safety disconnector is in a non-conductive state (see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0044]-[0045]).
For claim 7, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 3, wherein the at least two power supply circuits of the power converter circuit each have a gate driver circuit, wherein a first gate driver circuit is supplied with power from the first low-voltage branch and a second gate driver circuit is supplied with power from the second low-voltage branch (Fig. 1 of Ikuyama in view of Figs. 1 and 13 of Hirakata discloses the at least two power supply circuits 1, 15/51, 52 and 6/54 of the power converter circuit 4/62 each have a gate driver circuit (Fig. 1 of Ikuyama discloses a gate driver circuit 103U, 103L and Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses a fate driver circuit (12u, 12v, 12w) and {12x, 12y, 12z)). Ikuyama and Hirakata do not disclose specifically a first gate driver circuit is supplied with power from the first low-voltage branch and a second gate driver circuit is supplied with power from the second low-voltage branch. However, Fig. 1 of Ikuyama discloses a first gate driver circuit supplied with power from the motor control circuit 110 via gate driving commands 101U and a second gate driver circuit supplied with power from the motor control circuit 110 via gate driving command 101L. On the other hand, Figs Fig. 1 and 13 of Hirakata disclose the gate driver circuit (12u, 12v, 12w) and {12x, 12y, 12z) supplied from first and second low-voltage branch via the safety circuit 30 and motor control circuit 8. In view oof the first and second independent low-voltage branches of the modified Ikuyama in view of Hirakata system, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to supply the first gate driver circuit from the first low-voltage branch and the second gate driver circuit from the second low-voltage branch. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Ikuyama in view of Hirakata to have a first gate driver circuit is supplied with power from the first low-voltage branch and a second gate driver circuit is supplied with power from the second low-voltage branch for purpose of supplying safety critical inverter circuitry from independent power sources so that loss or failure of one of power source does not prevent execution of the inverter safety function.
For claim 9, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 1, wherein the operating DC-DC converter can be disconnected from the first low-voltage branch by means of a first safety disconnector (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses the operating DC-DC converter 15 can be disconnected from the first low-voltage branch 22 by means of a first safety disconnector 32 – see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0035] and [0044]).
For claim 10, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 9, wherein the first safety disconnector comprises at least one electronic switch between an input and an output and a control circuit, wherein the control circuit is configured to open or close the at least one electronic switch in accordance with a control signal (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses the first safety disconnector 31 comprises at least one electronic switch 31 between an input and an output and a control circuit 33, wherein the control circuit 33 is configured to open or close the at least one electronic switch 31 in accordance with a control signal – see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0043]-[0046]).
For claim 11, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 9, wherein the safety control device is configured to detect the presence of a shutdown situation when first safety disconnector is in a non-conductive state (see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0044]-[0045]).
For claim 12, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 1, wherein the operating DC-DC converter can be disconnected from the high-voltage branch by means of a high-voltage disconnector (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses the operating DC-DC converter 15 which can be disconnected from the high-voltage branch 1 by means of a high-voltage disconnector 2 – see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraph [0027]).
For claim 13, , Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 1, wherein the second low-voltage branch can be disconnected from an external power supply by means of a third safety disconnector (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses the second low-voltage branch 21 can be disconnected from an external power supply 6 by means of a third safety disconnector 31 – see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraph [0044]) .
For claim 14, , Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 13, wherein the third safety disconnector comprises at least one electronic switch between an input and an output and a control circuit, wherein the control circuit is configured to open or close the at least one electronic switch in accordance with a control signal (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses the third safety disconnector 31 comprises at least one electronic switch 31 between an input and an output and a control circuit 33, wherein the control circuit 33 is configured to open or close the at least one electronic switch 31 in accordance with a control signal – see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraph [0043]-[0046]).
For claim 15, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the inverter according to claim 13, wherein the safety control device is configured to detect the presence of a shutdown situation when the third safety disconnector is in a non-conductive state (see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0044]-[0045]).
For claim 16, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the Inverter according to claim 1, wherein the safety control device comprises at least two safety logic circuits, wherein a first of the at least two safety logic circuits is supplied or can be supplied with energy from the first low-voltage branch and a second of the at least two safety logic circuits is supplied or can be supplied with energy from the second low-voltage branch.
For claim 17, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose a method of operating the inverter according to claim 1, comprising: in the presence of a shutdown situation, bringing the power converter circuit into a safe state (see Ikuyama, Fig. 1, paragraph [0044] and see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraph [0047]).
For claim 18, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the method according to claim 17, wherein the operating DC-DC converter can be disconnected from the first low-voltage branch by means of a first safety disconnector (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses the operating DC-DC converter 15 which can be disconnected from the first low-voltage branch 22 by means of a first safety disconnector 32 -- see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0035] and [0044]-[0045]), the method comprising:
detecting that a shutdown situation is present when the first safety disconnector detects a fault, and/or when the first safety disconnector is in an open state (see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0044]-[0045]).
For claim 19, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the method according to claim 17,
wherein the power converter circuit comprises at least two power supply circuits, a first power supply circuit of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the first low-voltage branch and a second power supply circuit of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the second low-voltage branch (Figs. 1 and 13 of Hirakata discloses the power converter circuit 4/62 comprising at least two power supply circuit (51, 52) and 54, a first power supply circuit (1, 15)/(51, 52) of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the first low-voltage branch 22 and a second power supply circuit 6 of the at least two power supply circuits being energized from the second low-voltage branch 21 – see Hirakata, Figs. 1 and 13, paragraphs [0005]-[0006] and [0033]-[0034]),
wherein the first power supply circuit of the at least two power supply circuits can be disconnected from the first low-voltage branch by means of a second safety disconnector (Figs. 1 and 13 of Hirakata disclose the first power supply circuit 1, 15/51, 52 of the at least two power supply circuits can be disconnected from the first low-voltage branch 22 by means of a second safety disconnector 32 – see Hirakata, Figs. 1 and 13, paragraphs [0034] and [0044]-[0045]),
the method comprising:
detecting that a shutdown situation is present when the second safety disconnector detects a fault, and/or when the second safety disconnector is in an open state (see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0044]-[0045]) .
For claim 20, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the method according to claim 17, wherein the second low-voltage branch can be disconnected from an external power supply by means of a third safety disconnector (Fig. 1 of Hirakata discloses the second low-voltage branch 21 can be disconnected from an external power supply 6 by means of a third safety disconnector 31 – see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraph [0044]-[0045]), the method comprising:
detecting that a shutdown situation is present when the third safety disconnector detects a fault, and/or when the third safety disconnector is in an open state (see Hirakata, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0044]-[0045]).
For claim 21, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the method according to claim 17, comprising:
detecting that a shutdown situation is present when a fault occurs in the operating DC-DC converter (see Hirakata, Fig. 13, paragraph [0006]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikuyama et al. (hereinafter Ikuyama, US 2024/0424916 A1) in view of Hirakata (US 2023/0020544 A1), further in view of Kroeze et al. (hereinafter Kroeze, US 2012/0195087 A1).
For claim 8, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose all limitations as applied to claim 7 above. Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose the at least two power supply circuits of the power converter circuit each (see explanation in claim 7 above) which is silent for comprising a bias voltage supply circuit for the gate driver circuit, wherein a first bias voltage supply circuit is powered from the first low voltage branch and a second bias voltage supply circuit is powered from the second low voltage branch. However, Kroeze discloses providing each gate-driver portion with its corresponding bias-voltage supply circuitry (Fig. 3 of Kroeze disclose each gate-driver portion 305/310 with its corresponding bias voltage supply circuitry 315/320 – see Kroeze, Fig. 3, paragraph [0040]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Ikuyama in view of Hirakata with respective bias-voltage supply circuits as taught by Kroeze for purpose turning the inverter semiconductor switches on and off reliabilily.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikuyama et al. (hereinafter Ikuyama, US 2024/0424916 A1) in view of Hirakata (US 2023/0020544 A1), further in view of Iwagami et al. (hereinafter Iwagami, US 2022/0085747 A1).
For claim 22, Ikuyama in view of Hirakata disclose all limitation as applied to claim 17 above. Hirakata discloses the gate driving circuits (Fig. 1 of Ikuyama discloses the gate driving circuits 103U, 103L – see Ikuyama, Fig. 1, paragraph [0031]) that can activate short- circuiting when sensor circuit detects a fault (overvoltage) (see Ikuyama, Fig. 1, paragraphs [0041] ). Ikuyama in view of Hirakata does not disclose detecting that a shutdown situation is present when a gate driver circuit detects a fault, in particular in the power supply from the first low-voltage branch and/or the second low-voltage branch. However, Iwagami discloses detecting that a shutdown situation is present when a gate driver circuit detects a fault, in particular in the power supply from the first low-voltage branch and/or the second low-voltage branch (see Iwagami, Fig. 1 paragraphs [0003] and [0037]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify teaching of Ikuyama in view of Hirakara to incorporate teaching of Iwagami for purpose of protecting the inverter circuit from being damaged.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI T DINH whose telephone number is (571)270-3852. The examiner can normally be reached (571)270-3852.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at (571)272-2060 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.
/THAI T DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Sep 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights