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 were received on 15 January 2025. These drawings are acceptable.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 13-19, 21, 27; 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Maeda et al. (WO 2024/043124 A1, filed on 10 August 2023; hereinafter “Maeda”).
In re claim 1, Maeda discloses (Figs. 1-23) a method for optimizing an inverter (100D) for soft switching (The plurality of switches 8, the plurality of resonance inductors L0, the plurality of resonance capacitors 9, and the regeneration capacitor 15 are provided to perform zero-voltage soft switching of the plurality of first switching elements 1 and the plurality of second switching elements 2), the method comprising:
calculating efficiency values of the inverter based on a plurality of possible resonant inductance values (L11, 12, 21, 22, 31, 32) and a plurality of possible resonant capacitance (9U, 9V, 9W) values (More specifically, in the control device 50, for example, the detection result of the output current iU by the current sensor or its signal processing value, or the estimated value of the output current iU, and the inductance L of the resonance inductor L0 stored in advance, Using the detection result of the potential V15 of the regeneration capacitor 15, the additional time Tau is determined by calculating Tau=iU×(L/V15));
calculating change of voltage over time values of the inverter based on the plurality of possible resonant inductance values and the plurality of possible resonant capacitance values (Figs. 6-12. 21-22); and
selecting a resonant inductance value (18 U, 18V, 18W) of the plurality of possible resonant inductance values and a resonant capacitance value of the plurality of possible resonant capacitance values based on the calculated efficiency values of the inverter and the calculated change of voltage over time values (Abstract: The control device (50) switches between a second control operation in which the high-level periods of the control signals for two switches (8) of the plurality of switches (8) are overlapped with each other on the basis of the detected voltage potential at the fourth end (154) of a regenerative capacitor (15) and the polarities of a plurality of output currents (iU, iV, iW) output).
In re claim 2, Maeda discloses a method (see claim 1 rejection), further comprising:
calculating dead time values of the inverter based on the plurality of possible resonant inductance values and the plurality of possible resonant capacitance values (the power conversion device 100 can realize zero voltage soft switching. In the equation π×√LC representing a half period of LC resonance, “L” is the inductance of the resonant inductor L0, and “C” is the capacitance of the resonant capacitor 9.).
In re claim 3, Maeda discloses a method (see claim 1 and 2 rejections and Fig. 2), wherein the dead time values indicate a waiting time between two complementary switches (see Fig. 2, elements: Td, SW1; SW2).
In re claim 4, Maeda discloses a method (see claim 1 and 2 rejections and Fig. 2), wherein the calculating the dead time values includes calculating the dead time values based on at least two of a possible resonant inductance value of the plurality of possible resonant inductance values, a possible resonant capacitance value, a switch operation time, a switch temperature, an input voltage, or an input current (time Tau is determined by calculating Tau=iU×(L/V15)).
In re claim 5, Maeda discloses a method (see claim 1 and 2 rejections and Fig 20), wherein the selecting (18 U,V,W) the resonant inductance values and the resonant capacitance values includes selecting a resonant inductance value of the plurality of possible resonant inductance values and a resonant capacitance value of the plurality of possible resonant capacitance values that satisfy a threshold dead time value (in order to start LC resonance at the start time t2 of the dead time Td, the control device 50 sets the additional time Tau based on the output current iU so that iL0=iU at the start time t2 of the dead time Td.).
In re claim 7, Maeda discloses a method (see claim 1 rejection), wherein the calculating the efficiency values of the inverter includes calculating the efficiency value of the inverter based on at least two of an inverter voltage, an inverter current, a switch voltage, a switch current, a switch turn-on time, a switch turn-off time, a switch die temperature, or a number of switches in the inverter. (The control device (50) determines the detected potential of the fourth terminal (154) of the regenerative capacitor (15) and the polarity of the plurality of output currents (iU, iV, iW) output from the plurality of AC terminals (41). Based on the second control operation, the high-level periods of the control signals of two of the plurality of switches (8) overlap, and the second control operation does not overlap the high-level periods of the control signals of the plurality of switches (8).).
In re claim 13, Maeda discloses a method (see claim 1 rejection), further comprising: assembling the inverter (100D) to include the selected resonant inductance value and the selected resonant capacitance value (shown in Fig. 20).
In re claim 14, Maeda discloses a method (see claim 1 rejection), further comprising (shown in Fig. 20): changing (opening and closing of 18U, 18V; 18W) a value of a variable inductor of the inverter based on the selected resonant inductance value while the inverter operates.
Claim 15 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 1, therefore will be rejected under the same rationale as claim 1.
Claim 16 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 2, therefore will be rejected under the same rationale as claim 2.
Claim 17 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 3, therefore will be rejected under the same rationale as claim 3.
Claim 18 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 4, therefore will be rejected under the same rationale as claim 4.
Claim 19 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 5, therefore will be rejected under the same rationale as claim 5.
Claim 21 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 7, therefore will be rejected under the same rationale as claim 7.
Claim 27 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 14, therefore will be rejected under the same rationale as claim 14.
Claim 28 recites substantially similar limitations as claims 1 and 15, therefore will be rejected under the same rationale as claims 1 and 15.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 8-12, 20, and 22-26 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 6, Maeda et al. (WO 2024/043124 A1, filed on 10 August 2023; hereinafter “Maeda”) is determined to be the closest prior art. Maeda discloses a method wherein the calculating the efficiency values of the inverter includes calculating the efficiency values.
Maeda does not disclose a simulation model of the inverter. The other prior art does not provide the suggestion to modify Maeda to arrive at the claimed invention with the current limitations of claim 1.
With respect to claim 8, Maeda et al. (WO 2024/043124 A1, filed on 10 August 2023; hereinafter “Maeda”) is determined to be the closest prior art. Maeda discloses a method wherein the calculating the change of voltage over time values includes a voltage over time of the inverter based on at least two of a switch-on voltage of a respective switch, a switch-off voltage of the respective switch, a turn-on time of the respective switch, or a turn-off time of the respective switch.
Maeda does not disclose calculating a maximum change of voltage over time of the inverter based on at least two of a switch-on voltage of a respective switch. The other prior art does not provide the suggestion to modify Maeda to arrive at the claimed invention with the current limitations of claim 1.
With respect to claim 9, Maeda et al. (WO 2024/043124 A1, filed on 10 August 2023; hereinafter “Maeda”) is determined to be the closest prior art. Maeda discloses a method wherein the selecting the resonant inductance values and the resonant capacitance values includes selecting a resonant inductance value of the plurality of possible resonant inductance values and a resonant capacitance value of the plurality of possible resonant capacitance values that lead to a highest efficiency value of the calculated efficiency values and a lowest change of voltage over time value of the calculated change of voltage over time values.
Maeda does not disclose wherein the selecting the resonant inductance values and the resonant capacitance values includes selecting a resonant inductance value of the plurality of possible resonant inductance values and a resonant capacitance value of the plurality of possible resonant capacitance values that lead to a highest efficiency value of the calculated efficiency values and a lowest change of voltage over time value of the calculated change of voltage over time values. The other prior art does not provide the suggestion to modify Maeda to arrive at the claimed invention with the current limitations of claim 1.
With respect to claim 10, Maeda et al. (WO 2024/043124 A1, filed on 10 August 2023; hereinafter “Maeda”) is determined to be the closest prior art. Maeda discloses a method (see rejections above).
Maeda does not disclose a method, wherein the inverter is an auxiliary resonant commutated pole (ARCP) inverter. The other prior art does not provide the suggestion to modify Maeda to arrive at the claimed invention with the current limitations of claim 1.
With respect to claim 11, Maeda et al. (WO 2024/043124 A1, filed on 10 August 2023; hereinafter “Maeda”) is determined to be the closest prior art. Maeda discloses a method, wherein the inverter includes a plurality of first switches and a plurality of second switches (see rejections above).
Maeda does not disclose each first switch of the plurality of first switches including a respective resonant capacitor connected in parallel to the respective first switch. The other prior art does not provide the suggestion to modify Maeda to arrive at the claimed invention with the current limitations of claim 1.
Claim 12 depends on claim 11 and therefore contains allowable subject matter for the same rationale stated above.
Claim 20 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 6, therefore contains allowable subject matter under the same rationale as claim 6.
Claim 22 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 8, therefore contains allowable subject matter under the same rationale as claim 8.
Claim 23 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 9, therefore contains allowable subject matter under the same rationale as claim 9.
Claim 24 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 10, therefore contains allowable subject matter under the same rationale as claim 10.
Claim 25 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 11, therefore contains allowable subject matter under the same rationale as claim 11.
Claim 26 recites substantially similar limitations as claim 12, therefore contains allowable subject matter under the same rationale as claim 12.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Maeda et al. US 2025/0158539 A1 “Power Converter” (PCT filed on 17 June 2023)
Leppänen et al. US 2024/0178739 A1 “CONTROL APPARATUS FOR AN ARCP INVERTER”
Sohn et al. US 12,155,320 B2 “Power Supply And Method Of Supplying Power To Load”
Mauger et al. US 12,494,705 B2 “Systems And Methods For Controlling Soft-switching Current Source Converters”
Liu et al. CN 116,169,796 A “Soft Switch Battery Wireless Charger, Charging Method And Soft Switch Charging Control Method”
Hara et al. WO 2024/106284 A1 “Power Conversion Device”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicolas A Chapa Mills whose telephone number is (571)272-3683. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-6pm.
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 L 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.
/NICOLAS ALDEN CHAPA MILLS/Examiner, Art Unit 2838
/CRYSTAL L HAMMOND/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights