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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 25, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 10, recites “wherein the polyphase motor has three or mor phases of stator windings” which has a typo. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-8 and 12-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12/214,684. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-16 of US Patent No. 12/214,684 encompasses all the limitations of claims 1-8 and 12-20 of the present application.
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.
Claims 1-7, 9-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolenaers (US 2020/0298722) and in view of Nashiki (US 6,211,593).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Smolenaers discloses a reconfigurable traction-charging system residing in an electric apparatus [see the on-board charging system in Fig. 1 including a switching “reconfigurable” mechanism 16 comprising one or more switches to switch between the propulsion “traction” (first state) and charging (second state) modes, see 0030, 0043 and 0099] comprising:
a rechargeable battery [see battery pack 3 and 0039 and 0099],
a motor comprising a stator having a plurality of stator teeth and a plurality of stator windings wounded on the plurality of stator teeth [see electric machine 7 in in Figs. 1 and 14, which can be motor types such as an SR, IM, PMSM, BLDC which would include a stator having a plurality of stator teeth and a plurality of stator windings wounded on the plurality of stator teeth and see 0045 and 0234]; and
a controller [not shown in Fig. 14 but it is implied as shown in Fig. 2A, control module 20 is used to control the opening and closing of the respective switches during the propulsion “driving” or charging modes, see 0213-0233] for controlling the plurality of power switch [see 1412 in Fig. 14] devices and the plurality of contactors [see 48, 1414, 1422, 1424 and 1426 in Fig. 14], so as to configure the reconfigurable traction-charging system to operate in one of a traction mode and a charging mode, [see 0213-0216 and 0220-0234],
wherein:
under the traction mode [such as the propulsion “traction” (first state) mode]: the rechargeable battery [such as the rechargeable battery is not shown in Fig. 14 but is coupled to the first input 1450 as shown in Fig. 14] supplies electric energy to the motor [see 7 in Fig. 14 and 0173, 0213-0214, and 0216]; and
the two or more coils are connected in parallel or in series to form a phase winding[see motor 7 and windings 116 and 118 in Fig. 14 and 0088, 0213, 0216 and 0234]; and
under the charging mode[such as the charging (second state) mode and 0173 and 0213-0214, and 0216]:
connections associated with the plurality of power switch devices[see 1411 and 1412 in Fig. 14] and the stator windings [such as the stator windings of motor 7 in Fig. 14 and 0213-0214, 0216 and 0234] are configured to form a charger [see 1400 in Fig. 14] that draws electrical energy from an external power supply such as charging station via input 4 or grid 77 in Fig. 14] to charge the rechargeable battery [such as the rechargeable battery is not shown in Fig. 14 but is coupled to the first input 1450 as shown in Fig. 14 and see 0173, 0213-0213 and 0216]. ; and the two or more coils [see motor 7 and windings 116 and 118 in Fig. 14 and 0088, 0213 and 0234] and the at least one stator tooth form a transformer [see motor 7 and 0088 and 0234].
Smolenaers does not disclose wherein a stator winding on at least one stator tooth of the motor is split into two or more coils.
However, Nashiki discloses a motor comprising stator having a plurality of teeth, and a plurality of windings winding around the respective teeth, being supplied with since wave currents having respective phases, wherein around one or more teeth is two or more winding, and the number windings around the one or more teeth is decided such that an amplitude of a product of the number of windings times the sine wave current being supplied to the windings are the same with respect to all of the plurality of teeth [see col. 3, ll. 63 thru col. col. 4, ll. 1-8].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filling date of the invention to have modified the motor as taught by Smolenaers with the stator winding on at least one stator tooth of the motor split into two or more coils as taught by Nashiki in order to increase the magnetic field strength and the amount of current that can be carried. This in turn, increases the motors torque and efficiency. Additionally, multiple turns of winding help to distribute the current more evenly through the wire, reducing resistance and heat buildup. This allows the motor to operate more efficiency with less risk of overheating.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claims 1 and 12. Further, Smolenaers discloses wherein the external power supply [see 77 in Fig. 14] is a multiple phase power supply [see 0213-0214]; the system further comprises an input bridge rectifier [see 1411 in Fig. 14 and 0026 and 0214]; and the input bridge rectifier [see 1411 in Fig. 14 and 0026 and 0214], the charger [see 1400 in Fig. 14 and 0213], and the output rectifier form a charging power path having two stages [see 1413 in Fig. 13 and 0220-0233], including a first stage being a bridge rectifier front end with a Boost converter [see 1411 in Fig. 14 and 0215] and a second stage [see either 1412 or 1413 in Fig. 14] being an isolated DC/DC rear end [see 0213-0215 and 0220-0232].
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claims 2 and 13. Further, Smolenaers discloses wherein at least one stator winding on one or more stator teeth of the motor [see 7 in Fig. 14 and 0088, 0212 and 0234] constitute at least one Boost inductor of the Boost converter [see 0215 and 0229].
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claims 1 and 12. Further, Smolenaers discloses wherein the external power supply [see 77 in Fig. 14] is a single or split single phase power supply [see 0213-0214]; the system further comprises an input bridge rectifier [see 1411 in Fig. 14 and 0026 and 0214]; and the input bridge rectifier [see 1411 in Fig. 14 and 0026 and 0214], the charger [see 1400 in Fig. 14 and 0213] form a charging power path having two stages [see 1413 in Fig. 13 and 0220-0233], including a first stage being a bridge PFC rectifier front end with a Boost converter [see 1411 in Fig. 14 and 0214] and a second stage [see either 1412 or 1413 in Fig. 14] being an isolated DC/DC rear end [see 0213-0215 and 0220-0232].
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claims 4 and 15. Further, Smolenaers discloses wherein at least one stator winding on one or more stator teeth of the motor [see 7 in Fig. 14 and 0088, 0212 and 0234] constitute at least one Boost inductor of the Boost converter [see 0215 and 0229] .
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claims 1 and 12. Further, Smolenaers discloses external power supply [see 77 in Fig. 14] is a multiple phase power supply [see 0213-0214]; and the charger [see 1400 in Fig. 14 and 0213], and the output rectifier form a charging power path having two stages [see 1413 in Fig. 13 and 0220-0233], including a first stage being a multiple phase Boost PFC front end [see 1411 in Fig. 14 and 0214- 0215] and a second stage [see either 1412 or 1413 in Fig. 14] being an isolated DC/DC rear end [see 0213-0215 and 0220-0232].
Regarding claims 7 and 18, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claims 1 and 12. Further, Smolenaers discloses wherein the external power supply [see 77 in Fig. 14] is a single or split single phase power supply [see 0213-0214]; and the charger [see 1400 in Fig. 14 and 0213], and the output rectifier form a charging power path having two stages [see 1413 in Fig. 13 and 0220-0233], including a first stage being a single phase Boost PFC front end [see 1411 in Fig. 14 and 0214-0215] and a second stage [see either 1412 or 1413 in Fig. 14] being an isolated DC/DC rear end [see 0213-0215 and 0220-0232].
Regarding claims 9 and 20, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claims 1 and 12. Further, Smolenaers discloses wherein the motor is a polyphase motor [see electric machine 7 in in Figs. 1 and 14, which can be motor types of different phases, and 0045].
Regarding claim 10, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claim 9. Further, Smolenaers discloses wherein the polyphase motor has three or more phases of stator windings [see electric machine 7 in in Figs. 1 and 14, which can be motor types of different phases, and 0045].
Regarding claim 11, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claim 9, further comprising: an inverter [see controller 15 in Fig. 1 including 1411 and 1412 in Fig. 14 and 0214, 0220-0233], wherein the inverter can, while in traction mode, converter DC power to AC power, and use the AC power to drive the polyphase motor [see electric machine 7 in in Figs. 1 and 14, which can be motor types of different phases and 0045] to operate [see 0214, 0220-0233].
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.
Claims 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smolenaers (US 2020/0298722) in view of Nashiki (US 6,211,593) as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Choi (US 11,201,548).
Regarding claims 8 and 19, Smolenaers in view Nashiki discloses the reconfigurable traction-charging system of claims 1 and 12. Further, Smolenaers discloses wherein the external power supply [see 77 in Fig. 14] is a single or split single phase power supply [see 0213-0214]; and the system further comprises the charger [see 1400 in Fig. 14 and 0213], and the output rectifier form a charging power path having two stages [see 1413 in Fig. 13 and 0220-0233], including a first stage being a single phase Totem-Pole Boost PFC front end stage [see 1411 in Fig. 14 and 0214-0215] and a second stage [see either 1412 or 1413 in Fig. 14] being an isolated DC/DC rear end [see 0213-0215 and 0220-0232].
Smolenaers in view of Nashiki does not disclose wherein the system further comprises two diodes.
However, Choi in [Fig. 2] discloses a Totem-pole boost PFC front end stage [see 200] comprising two diodes [see 100].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to substitute the relay switches as taught by Smolenaers in view of Nashiki with the two diodes as taught by Choi since Smolenaers discloses these switches are able to be unidirectional, bidirectional, and implanted by electrical, mechanical or electromechanical devices including, but not limited to, transistors, MOSFETS, HEMTs, HFET’s, MODFETs, IGBTs, Sic, GaN, diodes, thyristors, contactors, relays or other such existing or future devices, represents simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERRENCE RONIQUE WILLOUGHBY whose telephone number is (571)272-2725. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30pm.
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 on 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.
/TERRENCE R WILLOUGHBY/Examiner, Art Unit 2836 9/30/25
/REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836