DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is in response to the amendment filed on 8/3/26.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. 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
3. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 1, 3, 9, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rana et al. (US 20170264206) in view of Usui et al. (US 20090251925).
Regarding claim 9: Rana et al. disclose (i.e. figures 1-4 and 9-11) a power controller (i.e. controller of figure 1) suitable for an asymmetric half-bridge power supply (i.e. 100) for supplying power to a load (i.e. load at Vout), wherein the asymmetric half-bridge power supply (i.e. 100) comprises a half-bridge (i.e. S1, S2), which comprises a charging switch (i.e. S1) and a resonant switch (i.e. S2), the charging switch (i.e. S1) and the resonant switch (i.e. S2) are configured to control a resonant circuit (i.e. Llk, Lm), which comprises a transformer (i.e. T1), the power controller (i.e. controller of figure 1) comprises:
a charging switch controller (i.e. controller for S1) configured to turn on the charging switch (i.e. S1) for a charging switch on-time (i.e. on time of S1) based on a compensation signal (i.e. signal from 355, Zfb, and diode connected to Zfb), wherein the compensation signal (i.e. signal from 355, Zfb, and diode connected to Zfb) is controlled by an output voltage (i.e. Vout to FB) of the asymmetric half-bridge power supply (i.e. 100); and
a resonant switch controller (i.e. controller for S2) configured to turn on the resonant switch (i.e. S2) for a resonant switch on-time (i.e. on time of S2) based on the compensation signal (i.e. signal from 355, Zfb, and diode connected to Zfb);
wherein the resonant switch controller (i.e. controller for S2) is further configured to adjust the resonant switch (i.e. S2) on-time so that the resonant switch (i.e. S2) on-time increases (i.e. figure 4: during modified active clamp mode, switch S2 on time increase during P2) as the load decreases (i.e. during medium and light load) (i.e. ¶ 34-37),
but does not specifically disclose a transformer and an oscillating capacitor connected in series with each other, the resonant circuit being coupled in series with the charging switch between an input voltage line and an input ground line, so that the oscillating capacitor receives energy from the input voltage line when the charging switch is turned on.
Usui et al. disclose a converter (i.e. figure 1 and/or figure 35) comprising a transformer (i.e. 5) and an oscillating capacitor (i.e. 4) connected in series with each other (i.e. 4, 5), the resonant circuit (i.e. 4, 5d, 5e) being coupled (i.e. electrically coupled) in series with the charging switch (i.e. 2) between an input voltage line (i.e. line for 3) and an input ground line (i.e. ground), so that the oscillating capacitor (i.e. 4) receives energy from the input voltage line (i.e. line for 3) when the charging switch (i.e. 2) is turned on.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Rana et al.’s invention with the converter as disclose by Usui et al. to produce highly stable DC outputs with high power conversion efficiency, high accuracy and less power conversion loss.
Regarding claim 3: (i.e. figures 1-4 and 9-11) whether the charging switch meets a predetermined conditions (i.e. condition for function of ZVS) for being capable of performing zero voltage switching (ZVS) when the resonant switch is turned off (i.e. ZVS of S2) (i.e. ¶ 34), and providing a comparison result (i.e. from 303); and controlling a length of the resonant switch (i.e. S2) on-time based on whether the comparison result (i.e. from 303) remains at a first logic value (i.e. value from 303) for a debounce time (i.e. blank time, also see figure 4 Tbnk) (i.e. ¶ 34, 37, 6-47).
Regarding claim 17: a (i.e. figures 1-4 and 9-11) non-symmetrical half-bridge power supply, comprising: the power controller of claim 9 (i.e. power supply of figure 1).
Regarding claim 1: the method steps will be met during the normal operation of the apparatus described above. (Examiner notes: For method claims, note that under MPEP 2112.02, the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Therefore the previous rejections based on the apparatus will not be repeated).
6. Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rana et al. (US 20170264206) in view of Liu (US 20100067259) and further in view of Lin et al. (US 20210091672).
Regarding claim 12: Rana et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the resonant switch controller is used to control the resonant switch on-time based on a detection signal occurring when both the charging switch and the resonant switch are turned off, and the detection signal represents a switch voltage stress of the charging switch.
Lin et al. disclose a power converter (i.e. figures 1 and 3B) comprising the resonant switch controller (i.e. controller for HSS) is used to control the resonant switch (i.e. HSS) on-time based on a detection signal (i.e. VCS) occurring when both the charging switch (i.e. LSS) and the resonant switch (i.e. HSS) are turned off (i.e. see figure 3B: signals DRV HS and LS during off period and signal VCS), and the detection signal (i.e. VCS) represents a switch voltage stress of the charging switch (i.e. HS).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Rana et al.’s invention with the converter as disclose by Lin et al. to increase power conversion efficiency of the ACF power converter.
Regarding claim 14: Rana et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the resonant switch controller is used to control the resonant switch on-time based on the current detection signal occurring within the charging switch on-time.
Lin et al. disclose a power converter (i.e. figures 1 and 3B) comprising the resonant switch controller (i.e. controller for HSS) is used to control the resonant switch (i.e. HSS) on-time based on the current detection signal (i.e. figure 3: see signal VCS during DRV_LS on period) occurring within the charging switch on-time (i.e. DRV_LS on period).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Rana et al.’s invention with the converter as disclose by Lin et al. to increase power conversion efficiency of the ACF power converter.
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 2, 4-8, 10-11, 13, and 15-16 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.
Conclusion
8. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1269. The examiner can normally be reached Flex: M-F 8-7.
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.
/Nguyen Tran/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights