DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Applicant’s arguments/amendments filed June 26, 2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Since the claims has been amended, please refer to the rejection below for the reason.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
3. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1, 12 and 20, the claim limitation “…first and second current source inverter (CSI) stages; a rectifier stage coupled to the input stage and configured to: convert power alternating current from the voltage source to direct current; and output the direct current to the first CSI stage; and an inverter stage coupled to the second CSI stage and configured to convert direct current from the second CSI stage to alternating current; and output the alternating current to an output source.” was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention because as best understood - the claim is appeared to be claiming based on the embodiment shown in Application’s Fig.1, which includes an input stage “102”, a rectifier stage “104”, a DC link with two independent current source inverter (CSI) stages “112”, DC energy stage (e.g. or load) 110, DC energy source or load stage “114”, an inverter stage “106” and an output stage “108”; and according to the Application’s Fig.1 and paragraph 37 in the Application’s specification, which states “the two independent CSI stages 112 includes a plurality of inductors (IL1, IL2, IL3 and IL4) electrically connected between rectifier stage 104 and inverter stage 106. The plurality of inductors may be arranged to store transient magnetic energy by means of current from Vsupply of input stage 102. After rectifier stage 104, the energy storage element (inductor) effectively sources DC current in the sense of a CSI. In a symmetric manner, the inductors connected to inverter stage 106 also serve as a CSI.”; however, it is known in the art that the inductors alone would not function as current source inverter (CSI) since the term “current source inverter” is known to convert a direct current to an alternating current (see support of “a current source inverter” in the US publication “US 2018/0145602” and also “US 2023/0238804”, cited by Applicant in the IDS submitted on Oct. 16, 2025). As being recognized the current source inverter functions as a DC to AC converter as explained above, then the first CSI (formed by IL1 and IL2 in Application’s Fig.1) would not convert DC output from the rectifier “102” to AC and also even if the second CSI (formed by IL2 and IL4 in Application’s Fig.1) would convert DC from 114 to AC, but it is not clear how would that be possible to provide the AC to the inverter stage “106”, which is supposed to convert DC to AC. Therefore, the specification was not described as the claim limitation is derived.
Dependent claims 2-11 and 13-19, respectively are also rejected at least the same reason as rejected independent claims 1 and 12 as stated above because the dependent claims 2-11 and 13-19 are depending on the rejected independent claims 1 and 12, respectively.
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim limitation “…first and second current source inverter (CSI) stages; a rectifier stage coupled to the input stage and configured to: convert power alternating current from the voltage source to direct current; and output the direct current to the first CSI stage; and an inverter stage coupled to the second CSI stage and configured to convert direct current from the second CSI stage to alternating current; and output the alternating current to an output source.” is being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention because as best understood - the claim is appeared to be claiming based on the embodiment shown in Application’s Fig.1, which includes an input stage “102”, a rectifier stage “104”, a DC link with two independent current source inverter (CSI) stages “112”, DC energy stage (e.g. or load) 110, DC energy source or load stage “114”, an inverter stage “106” and an output stage “108”; and according to the Application’s Fig.1 and paragraph 37 in the specification, which states “the two independent CSI stages 112 includes a plurality of inductors (IL1, IL2, IL3 and IL4) electrically connected between rectifier stage 104 and inverter stage 106. The plurality of inductors may be arranged to store transient magnetic energy by means of current from Vsupply of input stage 102. After rectifier stage 104, the energy storage element (inductor) effectively sources DC current in the sense of a CSI. In a symmetric manner, the inductors connected to inverter stage 106 also serve as a CSI.”; however, it is known in the art that the inductors alone would not function as current source inverter (CSI) since the term “current source inverter” is known to convert a direct current to an alternating current (see support of “a current source inverter” in the US publication “US 2018/0145602” and also “US 2023/0238804”, cited by Applicant in the IDS submitted on Oct. 16, 2025). As being recognized the current source inverter functions as a DC to AC converter as explained above, then the first CSI (formed by IL1 and IL2 in Application’s Fig.1) would not convert DC output from the rectifier “102” to AC and also even if the second CSI (formed by IL2 and IL4 in Application’s Fig.1) would convert DC from 114 to AC, but it is not clear how would that be possible to provide the AC to the inverter stage “106”, which is supposed to convert DC to AC. Therefore, the claims are indefinite.
Dependent claims 2-11 and 13-19, respectively are also rejected at least the same reason as rejected independent claims 1 and 12 as stated above because the dependent claims 2-11 and 13-19 are depending on the rejected independent claims 1 and 12, respectively.
Regarding claim 2, the claim limitation “…the first and the CSI stages…” is not clear what is meant.
Regarding claim 4, the claim limitation “…the inverter stage includes a set of switching devices configured to convert the direct current from the second CSI stage to the alternating current.” is not clear since the second CSI stage supposed to convert DC from 114 to AC according to the definition of “current source inverter” as known in the art and also as explained above in claim 1, thus the second CSI stage provides AC (not DC), and it is not clear how the inverter stage configured to convert the AC from the second CSI stage to the alternating current.
Regarding claim 12, the claim limitation “…a first and second current source inverter (CSI) stages; a rectifier stage coupled to the input stage and configured to: convert power alternating current from the voltage source to direct current; and output the direct current to the first CSI stage; and an inverter stage coupled to the second CSI stage and configured to convert direct current from the second CSI stage to alternating current; and output the alternating current to an output source.” is being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention because as best understood –
(i). the first underlined portion of the claim limitation “a first and second current source inverter (CSI) stages” should be “first and second current source (CSI) stages”; and
(ii). the claim is appeared to be claiming based on the embodiment shown in Application’s Fig.1, which includes an input stage “102”, a rectifier stage “104”, a DC link with two independent current source inverter (CSI) stages “112”, DC energy stage (e.g. or load) 110, DC energy source or load stage “114”, an inverter stage “106” and an output stage “108”; and according to the Application’s Fig.1 and paragraph 37 in the specification, which states “the two independent CSI stages 112 includes a plurality of inductors (IL1, IL2, IL3 and IL4) electrically connected between rectifier stage 104 and inverter stage 106. The plurality of inductors may be arranged to store transient magnetic energy by means of current from Vsupply of input stage 102. After rectifier stage 104, the energy storage element (inductor) effectively sources DC current in the sense of a CSI. In a symmetric manner, the inductors connected to inverter stage 106 also serve as a CSI.”; however, it is known in the art that the inductors alone would not function as current source inverter (CSI) since the term “current source inverter” is known to convert a direct current to an alternating current (see support of “a current source inverter” in the US publication “US 2018/0145602” and also “US 2023/0238804”, cited by Applicant in the IDS submitted on Oct. 16, 2025). As being recognized the current source inverter functions as a DC to AC converter as explained above, then the first CSI (formed by IL1 and IL2 in Application’s Fig.1) would not convert DC output from the rectifier “102” to AC and also even if the second CSI (formed by IL2 and IL4 in Application’s Fig.1) would convert DC from 114 to AC, but it is not clear how would that be possible to provide the AC to the inverter stage “106”, which is supposed to convert DC to AC. Therefore, the claims are indefinite and lack clear explanation of how the claim limitation is derived.
Dependent claims 13-19 are rejected for at least the same reason as rejected independent claim 12 as stated above because the dependent claims 13-19 are depending on the rejected independent claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, the claim limitation “…configured to covert alternating current form the supply voltage to a direct current…” should be “…configured to covert the alternating current form the voltage source to the direct current …” according to antecedent basis requirement.
Regarding claim 14, the claim limitation “…the inverter stage includes a set of switching devices configured to convert the direct current from the second CSI stage to the alternating current to.” is not clear because –
(i). the second CSI stage supposed to convert DC from 114 to AC according to the definition of “current source inverter” as known in the art and also as explained above in claim 1, thus the second CSI stage provides AC (not DC), and it is not clear how the inverter stage configured to convert the AC from the second CSI stage to the alternating current; and
(ii). the last portion of the claim limitation “to” should be removed.
Regarding claim 20, the claim limitation “…first and second current source inverter (CSI) stages; a rectifier stage coupled to the input stage and configured to: convert power alternating current from the voltage source to direct current; and output the direct current to the first CSI stage; and an inverter stage coupled to the second CSI stage and configured to convert direct current from the second CSI stage to alternating current; and output the alternating current to an output source.” is being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention because as best understood - the claim is appeared to be claiming based on the embodiment shown in Application’s Fig.1, which includes an input stage “102”, a rectifier stage “104”, a DC link with two independent current source inverter (CSI) stages “112”, DC energy stage (e.g. or load) 110, DC energy source or load stage “114”, an inverter stage “106” and an output stage “108”; and according to the Application’s Fig.1 and paragraph 37 in the specification, which states “the two independent CSI stages 112 includes a plurality of inductors (IL1, IL2, IL3 and IL4) electrically connected between rectifier stage 104 and inverter stage 106. The plurality of inductors may be arranged to store transient magnetic energy by means of current from Vsupply of input stage 102. After rectifier stage 104, the energy storage element (inductor) effectively sources DC current in the sense of a CSI. In a symmetric manner, the inductors connected to inverter stage 106 also serve as a CSI.”; however, it is known in the art that the inductors alone would not function as current source inverter (CSI) since the term “current source inverter” is known to convert a direct current to an alternating current (see support of “a current source inverter” in the US publication “US 2018/0145602” and also “US 2023/0238804”, cited by Applicant in the IDS submitted on Oct. 16, 2025). As being recognized the current source inverter functions as a DC to AC converter as explained above, then the first CSI (formed by IL1 and IL2 in Application’s Fig.1) would not convert DC output from the rectifier “102” to AC and also even if the second CSI (formed by IL2 and IL4 in Application’s Fig.1) would convert DC from 114 to AC, but it is not clear how would that be possible to provide the AC to the inverter stage “106”, which is supposed to convert DC to AC. Therefore, the claims are indefinite and lack clear explanation of how the claim limitation is derived.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
(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.
7. Claims 1, 2, 11, 12, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) (as best understood) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (2022/0393585) (hereinafter “Lee”).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a modular power conversion system (Fig.2, please refer to the whole reference for detailed), comprising: an input stage (input stage between 260-1 and 250-1) configured to connect to a voltage source (260-1); first and second current source inverter (CSI) stages (first CSI formed by Lf connected between 206-1 and 208 (as comparable to the inductor IL1 formed between 104 and 114 in the Application’s Fig.1); and second CSI formed by Lf connected between 206-2 and 208 (as comparable to the inductor IL2 formed between 106 and 114 in the Application’s Fig.1)); a rectifier stage (250-1) coupled to the input stage and configured to: convert power alternating current from the voltage source (260-1) to direct current; and output the direct current from the stage to the first CSI stage; and an inverter stage (250-2) coupled to the second CSI stage and configured to: convert power direct current from the second CSI stage to alternating current; and an output the alternating current to an output source (260-2).
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses the first and the CSI stages include a plurality of inductors (two inductors “Lf”) electrically connected between the rectifier stage (250-1) and the inverter stage (250-2).
Regarding claim 11, Lee discloses the first and second CSI stages are configured to operate without the voltage source (since the first and the second CSI stages received power from the batteries 204-1 and 204-2 and provide a DC voltage to 250-1 and 250-2; please refer to at least ¶ 28).
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses a modular power conversion system (Fig.2, please refer to the whole reference for detailed), comprising: an input stage (input stage between 260-1 and 250-1) configured to connect to a voltage source (260-1); first and second current source inverter (CSI) stages (first CSI formed by Lf connected between 206-1 and 208 (as comparable to the inductor IL1 formed between 104 and 114 in the Application’s Fig.1); and second CSI formed by Lf connected between 206-2 and 208 (as comparable to the inductor IL2 formed between 106 and 114 in the Application’s Fig.1)); a rectifier stage (250-1) coupled to the input stage and configured to: convert power alternating current from the voltage source (260-1) to direct current; and output the direct current from the stage to the first CSI stage; and an inverter stage (250-2) coupled to the second CSI stage and configured to: convert power direct current from the second CSI stage to alternating current; and an output the alternating current to an output source (260-2), wherein the first and second CSI stages include a plurality of inductors (two inductors “Lf”) electrically connected between the rectifier stage (250-1) and the inverter stage (250-2).
Regarding claim 19, Lee discloses the first and second CSI stages are configured to operate without the voltage source (since the first and the second CSI stages received power from the batteries 204-1 and 204-2 and provide a DC voltage to 250-1 and 250-2; please refer to at least ¶ 28).
Regarding claim 20, Lee discloses a modular power conversion system (Fig.2, please refer to the whole reference for detailed), comprising: an input stage (input stage between 260-1 and 250-1) configured to connect to a voltage source (260-1); first and second current source inverter (CSI) stages (first CSI formed by Lf connected between 206-1 and 208 (as comparable to the inductor IL1 formed between 104 and 114 in the Application’s Fig.1); and second CSI formed by Lf connected between 206-2 and 208 (as comparable to the inductor IL2 formed between 106 and 114 in the Application’s Fig.1)); a rectifier stage (250-1) coupled to the input stage and configured to: convert power alternating current from the voltage source (260-1) to direct current; and output the direct current from the stage to the first CSI stage; and an inverter stage (250-2) coupled to the second CSI stage and configured to: convert power direct current from the second CSI stage to alternating current; and an output the alternating current to an output source (260-2), wherein the first and second CSI stages include a plurality of inductors (two inductors “Lf”) electrically connected between the rectifier stage (250-1) and the inverter stage (250-2) and arranged to store magnetic energy by means of current from the supply voltage (which is a function of inductors “Lf”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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 of this title, 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.
9. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
10. Claims 3, 4, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 (as best understood) as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (2022/0393585) (hereinafter “Lee”) in view of Wu et al. (7,132,812) (“Wu”).
Regarding claim 3, Lee is used to reject claim 1 above.
Lee discloses the rectifier stage (250-1) configured to convert the alternating current from the voltage source (260-1) to the direct current
Lee doesn’t explicitly disclose the rectifier stage includes a set of switching devices.
Wu discloses an example of a rectifier stage (8) includes a set of switching devices (S1-S6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teaching of Wu to recognize that the rectifier stage includes a set of switching devices. The suggestion/motivation would have been to support the rectifier stage includes a set of switching devices.
Regarding claim 4, Lee is used to reject claim 1 above.
Lee discloses the inverter stage (250-2) configured to convert the direct current from the second CSI stage to the alternating current.
Lee doesn’t explicitly disclose the inverter stage includes a set of switching devices.
Wu discloses the inverter stage (20) includes a set of switching devices (S7-S12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teaching of Wu to recognize that the inverter stage includes a set of switching devices. The suggestion/motivation would have been to support the inverter stage includes a set of switching devices.
Regarding claim 13, Lee is used to reject claim 12 above.
Lee discloses the rectifier stage (250-1) configured to convert alternating current from the voltage source (260-1) to a direct current.
Lee doesn’t explicitly disclose the rectifier stage includes a set of switching devices.
Wu discloses an example of a rectifier stage (8) includes a set of switching devices (S1-S6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teaching of Wu to recognize that the rectifier stage includes a set of switching devices. The suggestion/motivation would have been to support the rectifier stage includes a set of switching devices.
Regarding claim 14, Lee is used to reject claim 12 above.
Lee discloses the inverter stage (250-2) configured to convert the direct current from the second CSI stage to the alternating current to.
Lee doesn’t explicitly disclose the inverter stage includes a set of switching devices.
Wu discloses the inverter stage (20) includes a set of switching devices (S7-S12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teaching of Wu to recognize that the inverter stage includes a set of switching devices. The suggestion/motivation would have been to support the inverter stage includes a set of switching devices.
11. Claims 5, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 (as best understood) as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (2022/0393585) (hereinafter “Lee”) in view of Toyoda (10,084,341).
Regarding claim 5, Lee is used to reject claim 1 above.
Lee discloses at least one direct current voltage source (204-1 and/or 204-2) electrically connected between the first and second CSI stages (first one formed by Lf in between 206-1 and 208, 204-1, 206-1, 210-1, 212-1, 212-3 and 206-3; and second one formed by Lf in between 206-2 and 208, 204-2, 206-2, 210-2, 212-2, 212-4 and 206-4).
Lee doesn’t disclose a switching device in series with the at least one direct current voltage source.
Toyoda discloses a switching device (7) in series with at least one direct current voltage source (53; column 6, line 12-20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teaching of Toyoda to provide a switching device in series with at least one direct current voltage source. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide a switching device so that to turn off upon maintenance of the battery as taught by Toyoda’s column 6, line 12-20.
Regarding claim 9, Lee in view of Toyoda is used to reject claims 1 and 5 above.
Lee doesn’t disclose control circuitry configured to control the switching device to control delivery of power from the at least one direct current voltage source.
Toyoda discloses control circuitry (control circuitry which control electromagnetic contactor 7; column 4, line 65-67) configured to control the switching device (7) to control delivery of power from the at least one direct current voltage source (53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teaching of Toyoda to provide control circuitry configured to control the switching device to control delivery of power from the at least one direct current voltage source. The suggestion/motivation would have been to supply power from the DC voltage source.
Regarding claim 15, Lee is used to reject claim 12 above.
Lee discloses at least one direct current voltage source (204-1 and/or 204-2) electrically connected between the first and second CSI stages (first one formed by Lf in between 206-1 and 208, 204-1, 206-1, 210-1, 212-1, 212-3 and 206-3; and second one formed by Lf in between 206-2 and 208, 204-2, 206-2, 210-2, 212-2, 212-4 and 206-4).
Lee doesn’t disclose a switching device in series with the at least one direct current voltage source.
Toyoda discloses a switching device (7) in series with at least one direct current voltage source (53; column 6, line 12-20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teaching of Toyoda to provide a switching device in series with the at least one direct current voltage source. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide a switching device so that to turn off upon maintenance of the battery as taught by Toyoda’s column 6, line 12-20.
12. Claims 6-8 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 (as best understood) as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (2022/0393585) (hereinafter “Lee”) in view of Toyoda (10,084,341) and Rohera (2018/0198290).
Regarding claims 6-8, Lee in view of Toyoda is used to reject claims 1 and 5 above.
Lee discloses the at least one direct current voltage source (204-1 and/or 204-2).
Lee doesn’t explicitly disclose (claim 6) the at least one direct current voltage source includes a sodium-ion (Na-Ion) battery; (claim 7) the at least one direct current voltage source includes lithium-ion (Li-Ion) battery; (claim 8) the at least one direct current voltage source includes Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) battery.
Rohera discloses an example of a direct current voltage source (220 in Fig.2) includes a sodium-ion (Na-Ion) battery; lithium-ion (Li-Ion) battery; or Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) battery (¶ 74).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee in view of Toyoda with the teaching of Rohera to provide (claim 6) the at least one direct current voltage source includes a sodium-ion (Na-Ion) battery; (claim 7) the at least one direct current voltage source includes lithium-ion (Li-Ion) battery; (claim 8) the at least one direct current voltage source includes Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) battery. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use any type of battery for storage purpose as supported by Rohera.
Regarding claims 16-18, Lee in view of Toyoda is used to reject claims 12 and 15 above.
Lee discloses the at least one direct current voltage source (204-1 and/or 204-2).
Lee doesn’t explicitly disclose (claim 6) the at least one direct current voltage source includes a sodium-ion (Na-Ion) battery; (claim 7) the at least one direct current voltage source includes lithium-ion (Li-Ion) battery; (claim 8) the at least one direct current voltage source includes Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) battery.
Rohera discloses an example of direct current voltage source (220 in Fig.2) includes a sodium-ion (Na-Ion) battery; lithium-ion (Li-Ion) battery; or Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) battery (¶ 74).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee in view of Toyoda with the teaching of Rohera to provide (claim 6) the at least one direct current voltage source includes a sodium-ion (Na-Ion) battery; (claim 7) the at least one direct current voltage source includes lithium-ion (Li-Ion) battery; (claim 8) the at least one direct current voltage source includes Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) battery. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use any type of battery for storage purpose as supported by Rohera.
13. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 (as best understood) as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (2022/0393585) (hereinafter “Lee”) in view of Toyoda (10,084,341) and Wu et al. (7,132,812) (“Wu”).
Regarding claim 10, Lee in view of Toyoda is used to reject claims 1 and 5 above.
Lee doesn’t explicitly disclose the input stage includes a multi-phase input.
Wu discloses an example of the input stage (input stage connected to 7a-7c in Fig.1) includes a multi-phase input (3 phases).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee in view of Toyoda with the teaching of Wu to provide the input stage includes a multi-phase input. The suggestion/motivation would have been to use a 3-phase power supply for motor as taught by Wu.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD TAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7455. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Menatoallah Youssef can be reached on 571-270-3684. 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.
/Richard Tan/Primary Examiner 2836
Prosecution Insights