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 .
Drawings
The drawings received on 11/08/24 are acceptable.
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, 3 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pentakota et al. (US 2019/0181764 A1) in view of Du et al. (US 10,797,533 B2).
Pentakota et al. disclose the claimed invention except for a step-down transformer. Du et al. teach the use of a step-down transformer in wireless power transmission system. Pentakota et al. disclose an isolated power transfer with integrated transformer and voltage control in Figures 1- 21.
Regarding claim 1. An apparatus comprising (Pentakota et al, Figure 2): a power transmitter (200) configured to generate a power waveform at a first voltage (VDD1), the power waveform including a series of successive on-times that are separated by an off-time; a transformer (Du et al. Figure 1, (14)) coupled to the power transmitter, wherein the transformer is configured to receive the power waveform and perform a single step down conversion of the power waveform at the first voltage to an output waveform at a second voltage (202); and a rectifier circuit (204) coupled to the transformer to receive the output waveform and produce a direct current (DC) rail voltage for use by one or more power consuming devices (see paragraphs 23-28). Pentakota et al. fails to teach a transformer configured to perform a single step-down conversion. Du et al. teach the use of a single step-down transformer in a wireless power transmission device in Figures 1-9. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a step-down transformer as taught by Du et al. in Pentakota et al. integrated transformer in order to satisfy the required output voltage so as to increase the converting efficiency.
Regarding claim 3.The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising ( Pentakota et al. Figure 17) a wire pair that connects an output of the power transmitter to a primary winding of the transformer (Du et al. Figure 1, (14))
Regarding claim 22. A method comprising (Figure 2): generating, with a power transmitter (200), a power waveform at a first voltage (VDD1), the power waveform including a series of successive on-times that are separated by an off-time; receiving the power waveform, via a wire pair, at a transformer (Du et al. Figure 1, (14)); converting, with the transformer, the power waveform at the first voltage to an output waveform at a second voltage (202); and rectifying (204) the output waveform to produce a direct current (DC) rail voltage for use by one or more power consuming devices (see paragraphs 23-28). Pentakota et al. fails to teach a transformer configured to perform a single step-down conversion. Du et al. teach the use of a single step-down transformer in a wireless power transmission device in Figures 1-9. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a step-down transformer as taught by Du et al. in Pentakota et al. integrated transformer in order to satisfy the required output voltage so as to increase the converting efficiency.
Claims 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pentakota et al. (US 2019/0181764 A1) and Du et al. (US 10,797,533 B2).
Pentakota et al. and Du et al. teach the claimed invention except for the range of values. Du et al. teach the use of a step-down transformer in wireless power transmission system
Pentakota et al. disclose an isolated power transfer with integrated transformer and voltage control in Figures 1- 21. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing was made to provide the range of values, since it has been that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed I the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routing skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-21 are allowed over the cited prior art of record.
Claims 4-15 and 23-25 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 16 is allowed because the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest an apparatus including the limitation “a rail voltage converter coupled to the second end of the wire pair, the rail voltage converter comprising: a transformer configured to receive the power waveform and perform a step down conversion of the power waveform at the first voltage to an output waveform at a second voltage; a rectifier circuit coupled receive the output waveform and produce a direct current (DC) rail voltage; and a comparator circuit coupled to receive the DC rail voltage and to compare the DC rail voltage with a reference voltage and generate a feedback signal to be communicated to the power transmitter“ in addition to other limitations recited therein.
Dependent claims 17-21 are allowable by virtue of their dependency.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 4 is allowed because the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest an apparatus including the limitation “a comparator circuit that compares the DC rail voltage with a reference voltage and generates a feedback signal to be communicated to the power transmitter, wherein the power transmitter is configured to adjust the first voltage of the power waveform responsive to the feedback signal so as to maintain the DC rail voltage at a desired level“ in addition to other limitations recited therein.
Dependent claims 5-8 are allowable by virtue of their dependency.
Claim 9 is allowed because the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest an apparatus including the limitation “further comprising a housing configured to contain the transformer and the rectifier circuit, wherein the housing is configured to mount to an integrated circuit package or to a circuit board on which the integrated circuit package is attached“ in addition to other limitations recited therein.
Dependent claims 10-11 are allowable by virtue of their dependency.
Claim 12 is allowed because the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest an apparatus including the limitation “wherein the transformer is a multi-monument transformer comprising a primary winding around a first monument, the primary winding configured to receive as input the power waveform, and a first secondary winding around a second monument, the first secondary winding configured to output a first output waveform at the second voltage“ in addition to other limitations recited therein.
Dependent claims 13-14 are allowable by virtue of their dependency.
Claim 15 is allowed because the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest an apparatus including the limitation “wherein the transformer comprises a single monument, a primary winding wrapped around the single monument and configured to receive as input the power waveform, and a secondary winding wrapped around the primary winding and configured to provide the output waveform at the second voltage“ in addition to other limitations recited therein.
Claim 23 is allowed because the prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest a method including the limitation “ comparing the DC rail voltage with a reference voltage; and generating a feedback signal based on the comparing, the feedback signal being communicated to the power transmitter to cause the power transmitter to adjust the first voltage of the power waveform responsive to the feedback signal so as to maintain the DC rail voltage at a desired level“ in addition to other limitations recited therein.
Dependent claims 24 and 25 are allowable by virtue of their dependency.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3 and 22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Examiner has cited particular columns, line numbers and/or paragraphs in the
references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although
the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to
specific limitations within the individual claim(s), other passages and figures may apply
as well.
Additionally, in the event that other prior art is provided and made of record by the
Examiner, as being relevant or pertinent to applicant's disclosure but not relied upon.
The references are provided for the convenience of the applicant.
The Examiner request that the references be considered in any subsequent amendments, as they are also representative of the art and may apply to the specific limitations of any newly amended claim(s).
It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing amendments or responses, to
fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the
claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art and/or
disclosed by the Examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADOLF D BERHANE whose telephone number is (571)272-2077. The examiner can normally be reached 7 AM - 10 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, Crystal Hammond can be reached at 571-270-1682. 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.
/ADOLF D BERHANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights