DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the application filed on 12/4/2024.
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 8 and 12-15 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. Regarding claim 8, it’s not clear as to which switches the limitations “the switches” is in reference to. Regarding claim 12, it’s not clear as to what is meant by the limitation “two cascaded copies of the converter module of claim 1”. It’s not clear as to what defines a cascaded copy. Dependent claim 13 inherits the deficiencies of claim 12 and is therefore also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b). Regarding claim 14, it’s not clear as to what is meant by the limitation “three copies of the converter module of claim 1”. It’s not clear as to what defines a copy of the converter module. Dependent claim 15 inherits the deficiencies of claim 12 and is therefore also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b).
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.
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)(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(s) 16, 18-19, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by of Lin et al. (US Patent 12132400). Regarding claim 16, Lin et al. discloses (see fig. 30) a converter module for converting AC power to DC power (operation of converter in fig. 30), the converter module comprising: a half bridge (bridge comprising S1 and S2) including a high side switch (S1) and a low side switch (S2), the high side switch being operably coupled to the low side switch via a first node (see connection of S1 to S2), the half bridge operable to at least one of receive and supply the DC power (operation of half bridge); an inductor (inductor assembly in 10) electrically coupled to the first node of the half bridge (connection to node between S1 and S2), the inductor operable to at least one of direct the AC power from a power source to the first node and supply the AC power from the first node to a load (operation of inductor assembly); and an auxiliary switching circuit (SA1/SA2) electrically connected in parallel to the inductor (see parallel connection of SA1/SA2 to the inductor assembly), the auxiliary switching circuit including a first switch operable to facilitate selective bypassing of the inductor (operation of SA1/SA2 being on wherein a portion of the inductor assembly is bypassed). Regarding claim 18, Lin et al. discloses (see fig. 30) that the auxiliary switching circuit includes a second switch (SA2) electrically connected in series with the first switch (series connection of SA1 and SA2), wherein a source of each of the first and second switches are connected together (SA1 and SA2 can be MOSFETs. The emitter of a BJT corresponds to the source of MOSFET). Regarding claim 19, Lin et al. discloses (see fig. 30) that the auxiliary switching circuit includes a second switch (SA2) electrically connected in series with the first switch (series connection of SA1 and SA2), wherein the first and second switches are connected in one of a common collector configuration or a common emitter configuration (see connection of the emitters of SA1 and SA2). Regarding claim 21, Lin et al. discloses (see fig. 30) a controller configured to direct operation of the first half bridge and the auxiliary switching circuit (controller used in generating signals to control the operation of S1/S2 and SA1/SA2).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 7-8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (Novel ZVS Three-Phase PFC Converters and Zero-Voltage-Switching Space Vector Modulation (ZVS-SVM) Control) in view of Lin et al. (US Patent 12132400). Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses (see fig. 5) a converter module comprising: a half bridge (bridge comprising S1 and S4) including a first switch (S1) and a second switch (S42); a filter inductor (Lr) electrically connected at the output of the half bridge (see connection to output capacitor); and an auxiliary switching circuit (S7 and Cr) electrically connected in parallel to the filter inductor (see parallel connection to Lr), wherein the auxiliary switching circuit is configured to cause, when the converter module is operated using fixed-switching frequency (see pg 224 which states “The switching frequency of both the main switches and the auxiliary switch are fixed”), zero-voltage switching of the first switch or the second switch or both (see pg 223 which states “When the auxiliary switch is turned off, the current in the resonant inductor with discharge the parallel capacitors of the main switches, then the main switches can be turned on under zero voltage condition”). Xu does not disclose that the auxiliary switching circuit including a pair of switches having their emitters electrically connected to each other or having their collectors electrically connected to each other. Lin et al. discloses (see fig. 10) that an auxiliary switching circuit (10) including a pair of switches (SA1/SA2) having their emitters electrically connected to each other or having their collectors electrically connected to each other (see connection of SA1 and SA2). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the module of Xu to include the features of Lin et al. because it’s used as means to reduce potential switching losses by facilitating zero voltage switching, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 3, Xu discloses an input (input to bridge comprising S1/S4) operable to receive power from a power source (power from AC source), wherein the input is operably coupled to the half bridge to supply power thereto (see connection of AC source to input to half bridge), wherein a load (load which is connected in parallel to Co) is operably coupled to the half bridge to receive power therefrom (load connection to receive output). Regarding claim 7, Xu discloses (see fig. 1) that the half bridge is operable to receive AC power from a power source (connection to receive input from AC source), and wherein the half bridge is operable to generate DC power (DC output from half bridge). Regarding claim 8, Xu discloses (see fig. 1) does not disclose that each of the switches includes: a MOSFET or an IGBT; and an antiparallel free-wheeling diode. Lin et al. discloses (see fig. 7) that each switches includes: a MOSFET or an IGBT (S1/S2 are MOSFETs); and an antiparallel free-wheeling diode (see diode connected in parallel to S1 and S2). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the module of Xu to include the features of Lin et al. because it allows for a specific design choice, which can provide a reduction in component variance, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 11, Xu discloses (see fig. 5) that the converter is operated according to a buck mode or a boost mode (see three phase boost rectifier in fig. 5).
Claim(s) 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (Novel ZVS Three-Phase PFC Converters and Zero-Voltage-Switching Space Vector Modulation (ZVS-SVM) Control) in view of Lin et al. (US Patent 12132400) and Delgado et al. (US Patent 5898583). Regarding claim 2, Xu does not disclose a first filter capacitor electrically connected in parallel across the first switch and the filter inductor. Delgado et al. discloses (see fig. 1) a first filter capacitor (C3) electrically connected in parallel across a first switch (S1) and a filter inductor (Lr). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the module of Xu to include the features of Delgado et al. because it provides for a filtering means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 4, Xu does not disclose a second filter capacitor electrically connected in parallel across the second switch and the filter inductor. Delgado et al. discloses (see fig. 1) a second filter capacitor (C4) electrically connected in parallel across a second switch (S2) and the filter inductor (Lr). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the module of Xu to include the features of Delgado et al. because it provides for a filtering means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (Novel ZVS Three-Phase PFC Converters and Zero-Voltage-Switching Space Vector Modulation (ZVS-SVM) Control) in view of Lin et al. (US Patent 12132400) and Li et al. (US 2026/0171931). Regarding claim 9, Xu does not disclose that the converter is controlled using a dead-beat predictive model. Li et al. discloses (see fig. 7a) that a converter is controlled using a dead-beat predictive model (see paragraph 0006). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the module of Xu to include the features of Li et al. because it provides for control means to that allows a reduction in cost and complexity, thus increasing operational efficiencies. Regarding claim 10, Xu does not disclose the converter is controlled according to a dead-beat predictive module once every switching cycle. Li et al. discloses (see fig. 7a, 7c) the converter is controlled according to a dead-beat predictive module once every switching cycle (see paragraph 0006 and fig. 7c). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the module of Xu to include the features of Li et al. because it provides for control means to that allows a reduction in cost and complexity, thus increasing operational efficiencies.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US Patent 12132400) in view of Zhou et al. (US Patent 11888398). Regarding claim 17, Lin et al. does not disclose that the converter module is configured such that the half bridge is operable to supply the DC power based on power received via the first node, and wherein, the auxiliary switching circuit is operable facilitate selective bypassing of the inductor to direct the AC power from the power source to the first node. Zhou et al. discloses (see fig. 3A) that a converter module is configured such that a half bridge (half bridge in 320) is operable to supply DC power based on power received via a first node (node between switches in 320), and wherein, an auxiliary switching circuit (SW4) is operable facilitate selective bypassing of an inductor (L1) to direct AC power from a power source to the first node (SW4 being on to send AC power to node between switches in 320). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the module of Lin et al. to include the features of Zhou et al. because it provides for a transient control means to prevent unwanted fluctuations in operation, thus increasing operational efficiencies.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US Patent 12132400) in view of Xu (Novel ZVS Three-Phase PFC Converters and Zero-Voltage-Switching Space Vector Modulation (ZVS-SVM) Control). Regarding claim 20, Lin et al. does not disclose that the auxiliary switching circuit is configured to cause, when the converter module is operated using fixed-switching frequency, zero-voltage switching of at least one of the high and low side switches of the first half bridge. Xu discloses (see fig. 5) that an auxiliary switching circuit is configured to cause, when the converter module is operated using fixed-switching frequency (see pg 224 which states “The switching frequency of both the main switches and the auxiliary switch are fixed”), zero-voltage switching of at least one of a high and low side switches of a first half bridge (see pg 223 which states “When the auxiliary switch is turned off, the current in the resonant inductor with discharge the parallel capacitors of the main switches, then the main switches can be turned on under zero voltage condition”). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the module of Lin et al. to include the features of Xu because it’s used as means to reduce potential switching losses by facilitating zero voltage switching, thus increasing operational efficiencies.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 22-23 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Glovinksy (US Patent 7960950) discloses a converter with zero current switching. Maeda et al. (US 2025/0158539) discloses a power converter with zero current switching.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY A GBLENDE whose telephone number is (571)270-5472. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Monica Lewis can be reached at 571-272-1838. 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.
/JEFFREY A GBLENDE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights