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 .
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 3 and 10 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.
Claims 3 and 10 recite the limitation "the pole voltage" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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 1, 3, 8, 10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mairal et al. US 12,537,515 B2.
Regarding claim 1, Mairal et al. disclose
An inverter driving apparatus (fig. 1, items 108 and 110) comprising: an inverter (item 106) including a plurality of legs corresponding to a plurality of phases (item 106 has three legs which inherently corresponds to a plurality of phases to control load 104) (column 3, lines 53-67, column 4, lines 3-15), respectively; and a controller (item 110) electrically connected to the inverter and configured to determine an offset voltage by which an amplitude of a cosine component (Vref.Ts.cosθ=V1T1) of a pole voltage (Vα) is less than or equal to a predetermined value (Vref) (V1T1 is x-axis component which is less than Vref) based on a phase voltage command (active vectors) and control ON/OFF states of a switch included in each of the legs by pulse width modulation in which the offset voltage is reflected (column 4, lines 3-67, column 5, 4-27).
Regarding claim 3, Mairal et al. disclose
, wherein the controller is further configured to determine the offset voltage by which the amplitude of the cosine component is less than or equal to the predetermined value based on an amplitude of a sine component (VrefTs.sinθ) of the pole voltage (column 4, lines 3-67.
Regarding claim 8, Mairal et al. disclose
An inverter driving method including: determining, by a controller, an offset voltage by which an amplitude of a cosine component of a pole voltage is less than or equal to a predetermined value based on a phase voltage command; and controlling, by the controller, ON/OFF states of a switch included in each of legs of an inverter electrically connected to the controller, by pulse width modulation in which the offset voltage is reflected, the plurality of legs corresponding to a plurality of phases, respectively (see claim 1 rejection for detail).
Regarding claim 10, Mairal et al. disclose
, wherein the determining of the offset voltage includes determining the offset voltage by which the amplitude of the cosine component is less than or equal to the predetermined value based on an amplitude of a sine component of the pole voltage (see claim 3 rejection for detail).
Regarding claim 15, Mairal et al. disclose
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium having recorded thereon a program to cause the inverter driving method of claim 8 to be executed (column 5, lines 28-34).
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 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mairal et al.
Regarding claim 4, Mairal discloses wherein the controller is further configured to determine the amplitude of the cosine component of the pole voltage based on Equation 1 by use of a first coefficient corresponding to the amplitude of the cosine component of the pole voltage, a second coefficient corresponding to an amplitude of a sine component of the pole voltage, and an order of a frequency component,
PNG
media_image1.png
48
360
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where an is the first coefficient (Voffset), bn is the second coefficient (T1-T2), and n is the order. (column 4, lines 54-67, column 5, lines 1-3. Mairal does not explicitly mention the exact relationship). However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the result-effective variables noted above to obtain the specific relationships between the structural elements thereby meeting the specific mathematical formula recited in claim 4.
The motivation to do so would have been a mere optimization of result-effective variables to minimize a total harmonic distortion (THD).
Regarding claim 11, Mairal discloses wherein the determining of the offset voltage includes determining the amplitude of the cosine component of the pole voltage based on Equation 1 by use of a first coefficient corresponding to the amplitude of the cosine component of the pole voltage, a second coefficient corresponding to an amplitude of a sine component of the pole voltage, and an order of a frequency component,
PNG
media_image2.png
75
562
media_image2.png
Greyscale
, where an is the first coefficient, bn is the second coefficient, and n is the order. (see claim 4 rejection for detail)
Claims 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mairal et al. in a view of Mori et al. US 10,411,615 B2.
Regarding claim 2, Mairal does not disclose but Mori et al. disclose wherein the controller (fig. 1, item 7a) is further configured to generate a pole voltage command (Vu, Vv, Vw) by adding the offset voltage to a maximum phase voltage command (Vub), an intermediate phase voltage command (Vvb), and a minimum phase voltage command (Vwb) of the phase voltage command, and to perform the pulse width modulation based on the pole voltage command (column 4, lines 41-67, column 5, lines 5-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to generate a pole voltage command by adding the offset to all three voltage commands as taught by Mori in Mairal’s teachings to reduce distortion factors, noise and vibration (Mori’s column 2, lines 43-49)
Regarding claim 9, a combination of Mairal and Mori discloses wherein the controlling includes generating a pole voltage command by adding the offset voltage to a maximum phase voltage command, an intermediate phase voltage command, and a minimum phase voltage command of the phase voltage command, and performing the pulse width modulation based on the pole voltage command (see claim 2 rejection for detail).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 and 12-14 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 and 9 disclose adding the offset. Claims 5 and 12 disclose details about determining the offset value.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee (US 10,498,216 B1) discloses a device for controlling an inverter.
MORI et al. (US 2019/0058418 A1) disclose a power converter having a first offset voltage computing section.
Lee et al. (US 12,184,213 B2) disclose a motor driving apparatus.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BICKEY DHAKAL whose telephone number is (571)272-3577. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-4:30 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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached on 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.
/BICKEY DHAKAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights