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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: EXTERNALLY EXCITED SYNCHRONOUS MACHINE WITH A CAPACITIVE TRANSMISSION ARRANGEMENT INCLUDING A FIXED TRANSMISSION DEVICE AND ROTOR TRANSMISSION DEVICE.
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.
Claim 8 is 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.
In claim 8 “the control device 9 is designed to transmit current information for providing an excitation current to the control unit 16 via the capacitive transmission arrangement 11” is unclear.
From fig. 1 the control device 9 is shown to transmit to the winding 4 through the inductive transmission system 7 in order to provide excitation current to the winding 4, as indicated by arrow 10; and the control unit 16 is shown to transmit information from the sensors 13-15 to the control device 9 as indicated by arrow 17, but it does not show the control device 9 transmitting to the control unit 16. Additionally it is unclear why the control device 9 would transmit to the sensors 13-15 to provide excitation current to the windings 4 when the sensors are not connected to the winding 4. In order to further prosecution examiner will interpret the limitation as the control unit is designed to transmit current information to the control unit via the capacitive transmission arrangement in order for the control device to provide an excitation current.
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 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 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.
(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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Topalov et al. *US20240331936, “Topalov”).
Re claim 12, Topalov discloses a method for operating an externally excited synchronous machine having:
a stator and rotor rotatable relative to the stator (fig 1, [0033] & [0046], 29 & 38 represent synchronous machine rotor winding), wherein the rotor has an exciter winding for providing a rotor field during operation of the synchronous machine (fig 1, [0033] & [0046], 29 & 38 represent rotor winding), wherein the synchronous machine has an inductive transmission system for wirelessly transmitting electrical power to the exciter winding for operating the exciter winding (figs 1 & 3-4, [0046], includes 20, 21, 22 & 26); a capacitive transmission arrangement 4 with a fixed first transmission device or means 2 (figs 2-4, [0047], 2 includes 5.1, 6.1,30a-b, 40 & 42); and a second transmission device or means 3 opposite the first transmission device or means 2 and arranged on an end face of the rotor (figs 2-4, [0047], [0051] & [0056], 3 includes 5.2, 6.2, 30a-b, 41 & 43; rotor includes rotor field, shaft 9, & pcb 7; where 5.2 & 6.2 are provided on end face of 7 or end face of rotor), the method comprising:
transmitting data between a rotor-external control device 40 of the externally excited synchronous machine (fig 2, [0047]) and a rotor-side control unit 41 via the capacitive transmission arrangement 4 (figs 2-3, [0047]).
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 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 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siepker et al (CN116231914, “Siepker”, using machine translation) in view of Topalov.
Re claim 1, Siepker discloses an externally excited synchronous machine 1, having a stator 9 and a rotor 2 rotatable relative to the stator (fig 1, [0011] & [0025]), wherein the rotor has an exciter winding 7,8 for providing a rotor field during operation of the synchronous machine (fig 1, [0025]), wherein the synchronous machine has an inductive transmission system for wirelessly transmitting electrical power to the exciter winding for operating the exciter winding (fig 1, [0029] & [0035-0037]).
Siepker discloses claim 1 except for a capacitive transmission arrangement with a fixed first transmission device; and a second transmission device opposite the first transmission device and arranged on an end face of the rotor for data transmission between a rotor-external control device of the externally excited synchronous machine and a rotor-side control unit.
Topalov discloses a capacitive transmission arrangement 4 with a fixed first transmission device 2; and a second transmission device 3 opposite the first transmission device 2 and arranged on the rotor for data transmission between a rotor-external control device 40 of the externally excited synchronous machine and a rotor-side control unit 41 (figs 2-3, [0047]); and
positioning the capacitive transmission arrangement 4 radially within the inductive transmission system 20, 21 (figs 1 & 3, [0045]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to:
configure the synchronous machine of Siepker to comprise a capacitive transmission arrangement with a fixed first transmission device; and a second transmission device opposite the first transmission device and arranged on the rotor for data transmission between a rotor-external control device of the externally excited synchronous machine and a rotor-side control unit, as disclosed by Topalov, in order to provide signal or data transmission between the rotor and stator of the synchronous motor without interference of the capacitive signal by inductive power transmission, as taught by Topalov ([0005] & [0008]); and
configure the capacitive transmission arrangement of Siepker in view of Topalov so the capacitive transmission arrangement is positioned radially within the inductive transmission system, as disclosed by Topalov, in order to position the capacitive transmission arrangement in a known mater, as demonstrated by Topalov, as well as reduce size of the synchronous machine by positioning the capacitive transmission arrangement at the same axial position as the inductive transmission system since there is the capacitive transmission will not be interfered with by the inductive transmission, as taught by Topalov ([0008]).
It is pointed out that Siepker in view of Topalov discloses the second transmission device is arranged on an end face of the rotor since: Siepker discloses the rotational portion 23 of the inductive transmission system is located on the end face of the rotor (fig 1); and Topalov discloses positioning the capacitive transmission arrangement 4 radially within the inductive transmission system 20, 21 (fig 3).
Re claim 11, Siepker in view of Topalov discloses claim 1 as discussed above and further discloses a motor vehicle, comprising: an externally excited synchronous machine according to claim 1 (Siepker, fig 4, [0044]).
Claims 2-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siepker in view of Topalov and in further view of Ludois et al. (US20130043762, “Ludois”).
Re claim 2, Siepker in view of Topalov disclose claim 1 as discussed above but are silent with respect to the capacitive transmission arrangement is designed as a rotor position sensor configured to determine an angular position of the rotor.
Ludois discloses the capacitive transmission arrangement 26, 28 is designed as a rotor position sensor configured to determine an angular position of the rotor (figs 1 & 8, [0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the capacitive transmission arrangement of Siepker in view of Topalov to be designed as a rotor position sensor configured to determine an angular position of the rotor, as disclosed by Ludois, in order to provide better control of the machine, as demonstrated by Ludois.
Re claim 3, Siepker in view of Topalov and Ludois disclose claim 2 as discussed above but are silent with respect to one of the transmission devices comprises a local, non-circumferential capacitive transmitter element and the other transmission device on the end face of the rotor comprises an annularly circumferential capacitive transmitter element whose capacitive properties vary along a circumferential direction, wherein the control device and/or the control unit are/is designed to determine the angular position using property information describing the variation.
Ludois further discloses one of the transmission devices comprises a local, non-circumferential capacitive transmitter element 28 (figs 1 & 8) and the other transmission device on the end face of the rotor comprises an annularly circumferential capacitive transmitter element 26 whose capacitive properties vary along a circumferential direction (fig 8, [0074], varied by 88), wherein the controller 30 is designed to determine the angular position using property information describing the variation (figs 1 & 8, [0061] & [0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the first and second transmission devices of Siepker in view of Topalov and Ludois so one of the transmission devices comprises a local, non-circumferential capacitive transmitter element and the other transmission device on the end face of the rotor comprises an annularly circumferential capacitive transmitter element whose capacitive properties vary along a circumferential direction, wherein the control device and/or the control unit are/is designed to determine the angular position using property information describing the variation, as disclosed by Ludois, in order to provide better control of the machine, as demonstrated by Ludois.
Re claim 4, Siepker in view of Topalov and Ludois disclose claim 3 as discussed above and further discloses the variation relates to a geometric extension and/or shape of the capacitive transmitter element 28 (Ludois, fig 8, [0074]).
Re claim 5, Siepker in view of Topalov and Ludois disclose claim 3 as discussed above and further discloses the variation relates to a material and/or a coating of the transmitter element 28 (Ludois, fig 8, [0074]).
Re claim 6, Siepker in view of Topalov and Ludois disclose claim 3 as discussed above and further discloses at least one of the capacitive transmitter elements 28 is designed as an electrically conductive plate (Ludois, figs 1 & 8, [0060]).
Re claim 7, Siepker in view of Topalov and Ludois disclose claim 3 as discussed above and further discloses at least one of the capacitive transmitter elements is designed as a metallic plate (Topalov, [0019] & [0056], discloses transmitter elements made of metal).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siepker in view of Topalov and in further view of Hyde et al. (US20110285256, “Hyde”).
Re claim 8, Siepker in view of Topalov disclose claim 1 as discussed above but are silent with respect to the control device is designed to transmit current information for providing an excitation current to the control unit via the capacitive transmission arrangement.
Hyde discloses providing a current sensor 120 on the rotor to provide an excitation current for the rotor winding 130 (fig 1, [0017-0018] & [0022]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a current sensor on the rotor of Siepker in view of Topalov, as disclosed by Hyde, in order to control the current of exciter winding of the rotor, as taught by Hyde ([0022]).
It is pointed out that Siepker in view of Topalov and Hyde disclose the control device is designed to transmit current information for providing an excitation current to the control unit via the capacitive transmission arrangement (as best understood by examiner the control unit is designed to transmit current information to the control device via the capacitive transmission arrangement in order for the control device to provide an excitation current) since: Topalov discloses the control unit 41 is designed to transmit information to the control device 40 via the capacitive transmission arrangement 4 (fig 2, [0047]); and Hyde discloses the current sensor transmits current information to a controller in order for the controller to provide an excitation current (fig 1, [0022]).
Re claim 9, Siepker in view of Topalov disclose claim 1 as discussed above and further disclose the control unit 41 is designed to transmit data to the control device 40 via the capacitive transmission arrangement 4 (fig 2, [0047]).
Siepker in view of Topalov are silent with respect to the rotor has at least one rotor sensor, wherein the control unit is designed to transmit sensor data of the at least one rotor sensor to the control device via the capacitive transmission arrangement.
Hyde discloses the rotor 110 has at least one rotor sensor 120 (fig 1, [0017-0018] & [0022]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the rotor of Siepker in view of Topalov to have at least one rotor sensor, as disclosed by Hyde, in order to control the current of exciter winding of the rotor, as taught by Hyde ([0022]).
It is pointed out that Siepker in view of Topalov and Hyde disclose the control unit is designed to transmit sensor data of the at least one rotor sensor to the control device via the capacitive transmission arrangement since: Topalov discloses the control unit 41 transmits date to the control device 40 via the capacitive transmission arrangement; and Hyde discloses the at least one sensor 120 transmits sensor data to a control (fig 1, [0022]).
Re claim 10, Siepker in view of Topalov and Hyde disclose claim 9 as discussed above and further disclose the at least one of the at least one rotor sensor is selected from the group comprising a rotor temperature sensor, a rotor current sensor and a rotor voltage sensor (Hyde, [0018]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Topalov and in view of Ludois.
Re claim 13, Topalov discloses claim 12 as discussed above but is silent with respect to determining an angular position of the rotor by the capacitive transmission arrangement.
Ludois discloses determining an angular position of the rotor by the capacitive transmission arrangement 26, 28 (figs 1 & 8, [0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the capacitive transmission arrangement of Topalov to determine an angular position of the rotor by the capacitive transmission arrangement, as disclosed by Ludois, in order to provide better control of the machine, as demonstrated by Ludois.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5715. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:30-5pm EST.
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, Seye Iwarere can be reached on (571)270-5112. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERIC JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights