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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1-2 and 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected claims, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/10/2025.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Claim limitation(s):
Bidirectional AC-DC-AC digital switching device.
have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because they use a generic placeholder coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim(s) limitations invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, the claim(s) have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for the claimed function.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; or
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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 following details must be shown in enabling detail or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Bidirectional AC-DC-AC digital switching device.
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.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
Disclosure of the structure of said claimed bidirectional AC-DC-AC digital switching device.
Rule 105 - Request for Information
Applicant and the assignee of this application are required under 37 CFR 1.105 to provide the following information that the examiner has determined is reasonably necessary to the examination of this application.
In view of Applicant’s lack of disclosure beyond the narrative operation of the following circuit(s), it appears Applicant intends for said components to comprise what is conventional and known in the art (see MPEP 608.02(d)) however applicant has failed to provide an adequate disclosure and description of said components, nor has applicant used conventional terminology for said components making the components unknown.
Therefore, Applicant is required to provide further background information on their invention, particularly for the following components of:
Bidirectional AC-DC-AC digital switching device.
including:
Component name as used in the art and as used by the manufacturer;
Component manufacturer; and
Component specification data sheet(s).
as well as a detailed summary of the improvements associated with the invention and any technical information known to applicant concerning the related art particularly for said components listed above.
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 4 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.
Regarding Claim 4
The claim limitation “the controller further configured to manage and monitor energy and value generation to the grid” is indefinite. First, the controller is previously claimed as “managing and monitoring” energy to the grid in claim 3 as it is configured to perform said monitoring and remote instruction execution. Therefore it is unclear what further structure is intended to be added to the controller via the claim limitation of “managing and monitoring” and what constitutes “managing” and “monitoring” beyond the already claimed managing and monitoring performed and claimed in Claim 3.
Furthermore, the claim limitation of “ value generation” is unintelligible as it relates to what structure is intended to be added to the controller for the apparatus claim. It is unclear what is meant by “value generation” as it is not an electrical term known and used in the electrical art and therefore unclear what function is intended to claimed thereby making the structure intended to be added by said function of said controller indefinite.
Regarding Claims 5-7
The limitation “bidirectional AC-DC-AC digital switching device” is indefinite for a variety of reasons.
Frist, the structure of the device is not disclosed in enabling detail.
The disclosure does not support means for claim construction of the term.
Regardless of the means for construction, the term itself is a contradiction in that it uses “bidirectional AC-DC-AC” which is a power term however includes “digital” which is a communication term making it unclear whether the component is intended as the known AC-DC-AC converter power component or some form of digital control component. AC-DC-AC implies it is the know converter however dependent claims 6 and 7attempt to add further functional capabilities outside the known converter structure. But if it is not the known converter and indeed some form of converter with control circuitry, known of such details are provided enabling details for said hybrid and unknown circuit.
Claim 5 will be examiner as best understood to refer to the known AC-DC-AC converter.
Regarding Claims 6 and 7
The claim attempts to narratively define the invention over the prior art in terms of function and not structure noting that the narrative descriptive operation of the bidirectional AC-DC-AC digital switching device has no structure recited to support any of said claimed narrative operation as it has no structure recited at all.
Because of the great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of the claim(s), it is not proper to reject the present claim(s) on the basis of prior art. (See MPEP 2173.06 and In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962).
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.
Claim(s) 3, 8, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Asakura et al. US 2023/0095670.
Asakura teaches:
3. A system for aggregation and exportation of power to the grid, comprising:
a controller (see FIGURE 2) configured to:
monitor a grid stability (read at least in part on Power Demand, FIGURE 3 and Spec. @ [0056, 0040-0041] emphasis on demand and balance of grid) of a grid and a cost of a unit of energy (see incentive controller [0014] and controller function wherein incentive is envisioned as cost [0071]);
monitor a status of a plurality of nodes within a fleet (read at least in part via STEP S1, FIG3 emphasis on “Obtain electric storage state information” and “obtain vehicle information”), wherein the fleet comprises a combination of mobile and stationary resources (mobile 10 and stationary 20, FIGURE1 noting that a vehicle itself reads on both mobile and stationary as a vehicle is mobile when operating but immobile when disabled or parked (ie when its wheels are off); and
selectively receive and execute remote instructions from a user (read on by at least user terminal 15, [0062] and/or for (noting intended use of said instruction only requiring the ability to use said information for said claimed intended purpose) transferring energy from at least one node of the plurality of nodes within the fleet to a grid (noting that said user input is actually used for transferring energy as claimed (see at least input from user 15 used by aggregator for performing power transfer, [0050]).
8. The system of claim 3, further comprising a communication system communicatively coupled with the controller and each node of the plurality of nodes within the fleet (see communication system of at least 15, 25, and 30 and respective communication lines, FIG1).
9. The system of claim 3, wherein the nodes include internal combustion generating units, hybrid combustion and electric units (10, [0045]), battery electric units (read on by at least 22, FIG1), or a combination thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asakura et al. US 2023/0095670 in view of Lewchuck et al. US 2023/0120740.
5. The system of claim 3, the system further comprising a bidirectional AC-DC- AC converter.
Lewchuck teaches use of a bidirectional AC-DC-AC converter for use with system for power aggregation (see Spec. @ [0113]).
It would have been obvious to incorporate the AC-DC-AC converter taught by Lewchuck into the system of X with the motivation of providing a known and available converting means with flexible and desirable design to combine all of AC grid/sources with DC sources and allow for power regulation and control through said staged conversion.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL CAVALLARI whose telephone number is (571)272-8541. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 0900-18:30.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (571)272-7492. 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.
/DANIEL CAVALLARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836