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 .
Objection to Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the phrase (see claims 1, 4-5, 9, 12, 14), “measured speed of one or more loads” (currently figs.2-3 shows motor speed calculated by controller 260/360 and not shown speed sensor for one or more loads), speed error, current error, measuring phase currents, current sensor, (see claims 1, 12, see spec., pages 12-13, para. [0060], [0063], [0064], [0066]) not shown and referenced, back EMF gain Ke (see claim 10, spec., page 21, para. [0104])) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Objection to Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The phrase, “nudge algorithm 221 or nudge term” is mentioned and shown in figs.2-4 (see spec., page 12, para. [0063]) and therefore not clear as to the phrase “nudge term” for proper understanding of the invention? What does Nudge term output? (see figs.2-4).
As to the phrase, (see spec., page 13, para. [0064]) “The global voltage demands are then fed back to their respective inputs of the torque/current control loop 220, and subtracted from their respective current error” is not clear as how voltage demands are subtracted from said respective current error? Current error not shown and referenced.
As to the phrase, (see spec., page 13, para. [0066], [0073]) “with a further feedback signal of the local output current demand subtracted from the speed error” not clear how the output current demand is subtracted from the speed error? Speed error not shown and referenced.
As to the phrase, (see spec., page 13, para. [0073]) “The local current demand (referencing needed) is then subtracted from the average global current demand (referencing needed), and the resulting difference is then scaled by a gain and feedback to the input of the speed control loop, and subtracted from the speed error from which the Q-axis local current demand is calculated is not clear how the resulting difference is then scaled by a gain and feedback to the input of the speed control loop, and subtracted from the speed error? Speed error not shown and referenced, resulting difference is not shown and referenced, gain not shown and referenced.
Appropriate correction is required wherever necessary in the specification.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112
4. 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 1-15 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.
Claim 1. A system for providing power to one or more loads, comprising
a central controller configured to output a speed demand for one or more loads; and
a plurality of power converters arranged in a parallel configuration with each other and configured to provide power to the one or more loads,
wherein each power converter comprises:
a speed control loop configured to calculate a local current demand based at least in part on an output speed error between the speed demand of the one or more loads and a measured speed of the one or more loads;
a torque/current control loop configured to calculate an output voltage demand based at least in part on the local current demand of its respective speed control loop; and
a module configured to modulate the output voltage of an inverter based on the output voltage demand from the torque/current control loop.
As to claim 1, the phrase, “wherein each power converter comprises:
a speed control loop configured to calculate a local current demand based at least in part on an output speed error between the speed demand of the one or more loads and a measured speed of the one or more loads” is not clear (as currently applicant’s figs.2-4, 15 shows motor speed calculated by controller 260/360 and not shown speed sensors for said measuring speed for one or more loads for said each power converter).
As to claim 1 state the phrase, “a torque/current control loop configured to calculate an output voltage demand based at least in part on the local current demand of its respective speed control loop” is not clear?
May be corrected as “a torque/current control loop configured to calculate an output voltage demand based at least in part on the local current demand of speed control loop of each power converter”.
“Current error” mentioned in spec (see pages 12-13, para’s [0060]-[0063]) is missing in claims 1 a and 12 for calculating the said local current demand and voltage demand.
Further to claim 1, the phrase, “a module configured to modulate the output voltage of an inverter based on the output voltage demand from the torque/current control loop” is not clear as to the module”
In general, “module” is a structure and said “module” can be corrected as PWM modulator (240/340, see figs.2-3) for proper understanding of the invention.
As to claim 12, the phrase, “A method of providing power to one or more loads, the method comprising:
receiving a speed demand for the one or more loads,
calculating, by each of power converter of a plurality of power converters, a respective local current demand based at least in part on an output speed error between the speed demand of the one or more loads and a measured speed of the one or more loads;
calculating, by each of the power converters, a respective output voltage demand based at least in part on the respective local current demand; and
modulating, by each of the power converters, the output voltage of a respective inverter, based on the respective output voltage demand” is not clear.
As to claim 12, the limitations are missing corresponding functional structures for above said receiving speed demand (from central controller missing?), above said calculating (speed control loop missing for calculating said respective local current demand and torque/current control loop missing for calculating said output voltage demand, and modulating structure (PWM modulator) missing, see applicants figs.2-4).
Merely reciting calculating, modulating are considered abstract idea and mental process without stating a physical functional structure and tangible practical application.
Appropriate corrections are required for clarity and to clear the following 35 USC 101 rejection.
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 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea, mathematical concepts and Mental Processes.
Claim 12. A method of providing power to one or more loads, the method comprising:
receiving a speed demand for the one or more loads,
calculating, by each of power converter of a plurality of power converters, a respective local current demand based at least in part on an output speed error between the speed demand of the one or more loads and a measured speed of the one or more loads;
calculating, by each of the power converters, a respective output voltage demand based at least in part on the respective local current demand; and
modulating, by each of the power converters, the output voltage of a respective inverter, based on the respective output voltage demand.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a patent ineligible abstract idea without reciting additional elements sufficient to integrate the exception into a practical application.
Step 2A, Prong 1- Directed to an Abstract idea.
The method claim is directed to Mathematical Calculations and Mental Processes, specifically calculating a speed error, calculating a local current demand, calculating an output voltage demand and determining modulation based on those values.
Step 2A, Prong 2- Integration into a Practical Application.
The method claim is rejected because it does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application as it lacks functioning structures that reflects an improvement in the underlying technology.
While the claim applies mathematical calculations, the claim does not recite an improvement to the functioning of the power converters or inverters, rather it uses generic power converters and inverters as tools to run the mathematical calculations.
Step 2B-Inventive Concept (Significantly More)
The power converters or inverter, are standard conventional generic hardware that are used as to perform mathematical calculations and modulating voltage.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claim does not recite an inventive concept, the claim applies mathematical calculations using power converters, the claim does not recite an improvement to the functioning of the power converters or inverters, rather it uses generic power converters and inverter as tools to perform the mathematical calculations.
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.
Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by MAEDA (Pub.No.: US 2015/0022137 A1).
Claim 1. A system for providing power to one or more loads, comprising
a central controller configured to output a speed demand for one or more loads; and
a plurality of power converters arranged in a parallel configuration with each other and configured to provide power to the one or more loads,
wherein each power converter comprises:
a speed control loop configured to calculate a local current demand based at least in part on an output speed error between the speed demand of the one or more loads and a measured speed of the one or more loads;
a torque/current control loop configured to calculate an output voltage demand based at least in part on the local current demand of its respective speed control loop; and
a module configured to modulate the output voltage of an inverter based on the output voltage demand from the torque/current control loop.
(As to claim 1, MAEDA teaches a system (fig.1, para. [0024]-[0026], [0029]) for providing power to one or more loads [MAIN MOTOR 6m, SUB MOTOR 6s/DRIVEN OBJECT 8), comprising
a central controller [MASTER CONTROLLER 13] (fig.1, para’s [0036] thru [0041]) configured to output (VIA MOTOR CONTROLLER 12) a speed command [ωm/[ωs] for one or more loads [MAIN MOTOR 6m, SUB MOTOR 6]; and
a plurality of power converters [MOTOR DRIVING UNITS 25m, 25s] (connecting INVERTERS 4m, 4s] arranged in a parallel configuration (SEE FIG.1) with each other and configured to provide power to the one or more loads [MAIN MOTOR 6m, SUB MOTOR 6s/DRIVEN OBJECT 8),
wherein each power converter [MOTOR DRIVING UNIT 25m/ MOTOR DRIVING UNIT 25s]
comprises:
a speed control loop [SPEED CONTROL UNIT 24M]/[SPEED CONTROL UNIT 24S] (feedback loop shown, see fig.1, para’s [0036] thru [0041], [0049]-[0050]) configured to calculate (via 41m/41s] a local current command [Im/Is] based at least in part on an output speed error [ωm- ωm’]/ [ωs- ωs’] between the speed command [ωm/[ωs]] of the one or more loads [MAIN MOTOR 6m/SUB MOTOR 6s] and a measured speed [ωm’/ ωs’] of the one or more loads [MAIN MOTOR 6m, SUB MOTOR 6s];
a torque/current control loop [CURRENT CONTROL UNIT 43M/43S] configured to calculate an output voltage command [Vm/Vs] based at least in part on the local current command [Im/Is] of respective speed control loop [SPEED CONTROL UNIT 24M/[SPEED CONTROL UNIT 24S]; and
a module [converter module 2, 3] (fig.1, para’s [0025]-[0026]) configured to modulate the output voltage of an inverter 4m/4s based on the output voltage command Vm/Vs (see fig.1, para. [0051]) from the torque/current control loop [CURRENT CONTROL UNIT 43M/43S].
Claim 12. A method of providing power to one or more loads, the method comprising:
receiving a speed demand for the one or more loads,
calculating, by each of power converter of a plurality of power converters, a respective local current demand based at least in part on an output speed error between the speed demand of the one or more loads and a measured speed of the one or more loads;
calculating, by each of the power converters, a respective output voltage demand based at least in part on the respective local current demand; and
modulating, by each of the power converters, the output voltage of a respective inverter, based on the respective output voltage demand.
(As to claim 12, MAEDA teaches a method (using figs.1-6, para. [0016], [0024]-[0026], [0029] and para. [0071], lines 1-2) of providing power to one or more loads [MAIN MOTOR 6m, SUB MOTOR 6s/DRIVEN OBJECT 8), the method (figs.1-6, para. [0071], lines 1-2) comprising:
receiving a speed command [ωm/[ωs] (via MOTOR CONTROLLER 12] (FIG.1) for the one or more loads [MAIN MOTOR 6m, SUB MOTOR 6s],
calculating, by each of power converter [MOTOR DRIVING UNIT 25m/25s] (fig.1) of a plurality of power converters [MOTOR DRIVING UNIT 25m, MOTOR DRIVING UNIT 25s], a respective local current command Im/Is (via speed control unit 24m/24s) (see fig.1) based at least in part on an output speed error [ωm- ωm’]/ [ωs- ωs’] between the speed command [ωm/[ωs]] of the one or more loads [MAIN MOTOR 6m/SUB MOTOR 6s] and a measured speed [ωm’/ ωs’] of the one or more loads [MAIN MOTOR 6m, SUB MOTOR 6s] (see figs.1-2, para’s [0036] thru [0041], [0049]-[0050]);
calculating, by each of the power converters [MOTOR DRIVING UNIT 25m, MOTOR DRIVING UNIT 25s] (connecting inverters 4m, 4s, see fig.1), a respective output voltage command Vm/Vs (via current control unit 43m/43s) based at least in part on the respective local current command Im/Is (see fig.1); and
modulating, by each of the power converters [MOTOR DRIVING UNIT 25m, MOTOR DRIVING UNIT 25s] (connecting inverters 4m, 4s, see fig.1), the output voltage of a respective inverter 4m/4s, based on the respective output voltage command Vm/Vs (see fig.1, para. [0051]).
Allowable Subject-matter
Claims 2-8, 9-11 and 15 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.
Claims 2-8, 9-11 and 13-15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As to claim 2, Prior art of records (closest prior art, MAEDA) fails to teach
the central controller is configured to calculate a global current demand based upon the local current demands calculated by each of the power converters, and transmit the global current demand to each of the power converters; and wherein each speed control loop is further configured to calculate its local current demand based at least in part on a proportional feedback signal of the global current demand. Claims 3-8 depend on allowable claim 2.
As to claim 9, Prior art of records (closest prior art, MAEDA) fails to teach the system is configured to calculate each output voltage demand further based on a feedforward term that is proportional to the measured speed of the one or more loads. Claim 10 depend on allowable claim 9.
As to claim 11, Prior art of records (closest prior art, MAEDA) fails to teach the central controller is configured to instruct one or more of the plurality of power converters to come online in order to meet the speed demand.
As to claim 13-15, Prior art of records (closest prior art, MAEDA) fails to teach the method of claim 12, wherein each respective local current demand is calculated based at least in part on a proportional feedback signal of a global current demand, the global current being calculated based upon the local current demands. If claims 13 and 14 be added to claim 12, the claim will still be rejected under 101 abstract idea.
However, in order to determine allowability of claims 2-8, 9-11 and 15 (of claims 1-15), formal requirements outstanding (see objection to drawings and specification and 35 U.S.C.101 rejection of claims 12-14, 35 USC 112 rejection of claims 1-15 needs to be corrected and clarified in response to this office action and needs to overcome the 35 USC 102 rejection of claims 1 and 12.
Citation of Pertinent Prior art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:(HOGAN et al., Pub. No.: US 2022/0021323 A1) teaches
DISTRIBUTED CONTROL ARCHITECTURES FOR MOTOR DRIVES (See figs.1-8, abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTONY M PAUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1608. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am to 4 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, Mr. 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.
/ANTONY M PAUL/
Primary Examiner of Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights