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 .
Detailed Action
This is the first action on the merits (FAOM) to this instant application in which claims 1-13 are pending. Claims 1, 5 and 9 are independent and claims 2-4, 6-8 and 10-13 are dependent.
It is worth mentioning here in the outset that the Applicants seems to have not filed any IDS (Information disclosure statement) with this application.
Drawing
The drawings are objected to because each of Fig. 6-8 represents a flow chart having merely numbered boxes which are not comprehensible on their own without deciphering with the specification. Each of these boxes represent a step of function and should include additional descriptive language describing each step.
The drawing further objected because a reference numeral 600 is found in the instant specification; however, the reference numeral is not shown in the instant drawing.
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 “A fuel Cell system” in claim 6 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
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.
Claim Objection
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: to be consistent with naming scheme of switches provided in claim 1, “a switch” of the claim should be replaced with - -a step-up switch- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: the word, “opeably” should be replaced with - -operably- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Rejection under 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.
Claims 1-2, 5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hsiao (US-2018/0331619-A1).
Claim No.
Claim feature
Prior art
Hsiao (US-2018/0331619-A1)
1
A control device for a DCDC converter, the DCDC converter comprising an upper bridge switch for a step-down mode, a lower bridge switch for the step-down mode, and an inductor, wherein the control device is configured:
Hsiao discloses a control device (100) for a DC-Dc converter (11) as claims, see Fig. 21 and 3A, 3B.
Upper bridge switch (Q1)
Lower bridge switch (Q2)
Inductor (L)
The DC-Dc converter (11), in Hsiao, is understood to be in step-down operation mode when the output voltage Vout of the DC-DC converter is set lower2 than Vin.
to control the upper bridge switch for the step-down mode and the lower bridge switch for the step-down mode, such that:
the upper bridge switch for the step-down mode is conducting and the lower bridge switch for the step-down mode is disconnected within a first period; and
the upper bridge switch for the step-down mode is disconnected and the lower bridge switch for the step-down mode is conducting within a second period, such that a current passing through the inductor within the second period changes from a positive current to a negative current.
The control circuit (100) is configured to control the upper bridge switch and the lower bridge switch as claimed, see Fig. 3A and 3B.
Current IL2 reverses direction as claimed, see IL2 in Fig. 3A and 3B, see IL2 current going negative after the Vout surpasses a preset voltage Vth.
Duty periods of signals of switches SUG2 and SLG2 changes after Vout surpasses the preset voltage Vth and further, after Vout surpasses Vth, the inductor current builds up and moves to positive side during ON time of switch SUG2 and tends to go negative during switch SLG2 is in ON state.
2
The control device according to claim 1, wherein the lower bridge switch for the step-down mode is one of: an insulated gate bipolar transistor, a metal-oxide semiconductor field-effect transistor, and a triode.
Hsiao meets claim 2, see Fig. 2 which shows circuit symbol of Q2 to represent an IGBT or a MOS field-effect transistor as claimed.
5
A DCDC converter system, comprising: the DCDC converter including (i) an upper bridge switch for a step-down mode, (ii) a lower bridge switch for the step-down mode, and (iii) an inductor; and a control device operably connected to the DCDC converter, the control device configured to control the upper bridge switch for the step-down mode and the lower bridge switch for the step-down mode, such that: the upper bridge switch for the step-down mode is conducting and the lower bridge switch for the step-down mode is disconnected within a first period; and the upper bridge switch for the step-down mode is disconnected and the lower bridge switch for the step-down mode is conducting within a second period, such that a current passing through the inductor within the second period changes from a positive current to a negative current.
Scope of Claim 5 is like that of claim 1. See treatment of claim 1 as being anticipated by Hsiao for item matchings of claim 5.
9
A method for controlling a DCDC converter, the DCDC converter comprising an upper bridge switch for a step-down mode, a lower bridge switch for the step-down mode, and an inductor, the method comprising: conducting the upper bridge switch for the step-down mode and disconnecting the lower bridge switch for the step-down mode within a first period; and disconnecting the upper bridge switch for the step-down mode and conducting the lower bridge switch for the step-down mode within a second period, such that a current passing through the inductor within the second period changes from a positive current to a negative current.
Scope of claim 9 is like that of claim 1. See treatment of claim 1 above as shown to be being anticipated by Hsiao for item matching between features of claim 9 and prior art reference Hsiao.
Rejection under 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 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsiao (US-2018/0331619-A1) in view of Williams (US-2012/0206118-A1).
As claim 3, Hsiao discloses a control device according to claim 1, however, Hsiao is silent regarding a switch for step-up mode.
Even though Hsiao is silent, such features are commonly found in related art. For example, Willimas discloses DCDC converter (800) wherein it discloses an upper bridge switch (804), a lower bridge switch (806) and it further discloses a switch (810, 812) for step-up mode. Hsiao discloses the switches (810, 812) that will enable DCDC converter to perform as step-up and step-down DCDC converter which is more versatile than just step-down DCDC converter.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art as of the filing of the instant claim 3, to modify Hsiao to include a switch (810, 812) to enable the DCDC converter to operate in both step-down as well as step-up mode as claimed in the instant claim which makes the device more versatile. The combined DCDC converter will look like DCDC converter as shown in Fig. 8 in Hsiao.
As to claim 4, the proposed combination of Hsiao and Williams will result into a 4-swicth step-up and step-down DCDC converter.
Claims 6-7, 10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mehrazi (US-2024/0304841-A1) in view of Hsiao (US-2018/0331619-A1).
Mehrazi is from the same Applicant as that of claims of instant application. However, Mehrazi was published before the US filing of the instant claims. Further Mehrazi’s filing date is outside of one year grace period. Therefore, Mehrazi is a valid prior art agianst the instant claims.
As to claim 6, Mehrazi discloses a fuel cell (PEMFC3) system comprising a fuel cell and a DCDC converter where DCDC converter applies an AC current4 to the fuel cell.
However, Mehrazi is silent regarding a detailed structure of the DCDC converter as set forth in independent claim 5.
Even though Mehrazi does not disclose detailed structure of a DCDC converter described in claim 5, all features of claim 5 have been shown to be anticipated by Hsiao, see treatment of claim 5 under 35 USC 102, above.
Since Mehrazi lacks details of DCDC converter system, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art as of the filing of claim 6 to replace details of claim with that of Hsiao and arrive at the invention at hand.
As to claim 7, the proposed Mehrazi and Hsiao combination meets features of claim 6, and further, Mehrazi discloses the AC current is applied to determine an electrochemical impedance spectroscopy of the fuel cell.
As to method claim 10, the method steps thereof are met by operation of Mehrazi-Hsiao combination as applied to claim 7.
As to claim 12, the claim is met by Mehrazi-Hsiao combination as both Mehrazi and Hsiao can be understood to have processors to carry out the method steps of claim 10, because determination of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy of the fuel cell cannot be performed manually or mentally.
As to claim 13, the claim is met by operation of Mehrazi-Hsiao combination as applied to claim 10 as both Mehrazi and Hsiao can be understood to have non-transitory computer-readable recording medium to store instructions to carry out the method steps of claim 10, because determination of electrochemical impedance spectroscopy of the fuel cell cannot be performed manually or mentally.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 11 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:
As to claim 8, the claim would be allowable if written in independent form because the prior art of the record neither discloses nor reasonably suggests a fuel cell system according to claim 6, wherein the DCDC converter outputs a DC current ranging from 0-600 A.
As to claim 11, the claim would be allowable if written in independent form because the prior art of the record neither discloses nor reasonably suggests the method according to claim 10, wherein the DCDC converter is capable of outputting a DC current ranging from 0-600 A.
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.”
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to G.M. HYDER whose telephone number is (571)270-3896. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9 AM- 5 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, Stephanie Bloss, can be reached on (571) 272-3555. 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.
G.M. HYDER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2852
/G.M. A HYDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
1 Examiner comment: for convenience Fig. 2 and Fig. 3A and 3B of Hsiao are copied and pasted here in the footnote.
PNG
media_image1.png
478
679
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
573
409
media_image2.png
Greyscale
2 Examiner Comment: As shown in Fig. 3A and 3B, the output voltage Vout of the DC-DC converter (11) in Hsiao can vary during a soft start period (PSB). It is further noted by this Examiner that output voltage of a typical DC-DC converter can be set to be stepped-up voltage as well as stepped-down voltage as desired by a designer/manufacturer of the DC-DC converter at a design phase.
3Examiner Comment: Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell (PEMFC) is an example of fuel cell where hydrogen is the fuel.
4 Examiner comment: see para [0045] in Mehrazi, where it describes application of AC current (signals) to the fuel cell.
Prosecution Insights