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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Embodiment A1 in Group A, and Embodiment B1 in Group B corresponding to claims 1-9, and 12-20 with claims 10-11 withdrawn in the reply filed on 8/10/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the examiner did not indicate whether any claims were generic (Remarks, pg.1). The argument is not directed towards the subject matter of the restriction but is directed towards the formality of indicating generic claims. Therefore, since the examiner agrees with claims 1 and 13 being generic, there are no arguments directed towards the substance/rationale for requiring the species restriction, and therefore the restriction requirement remains upheld, with claims 1 and 13 being generic and claims 10-11 withdrawn.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claims 7, 12 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 recites in the preamble “… based on the deviation between the target output parameter and the output parameter…” Claim 1, however, recites “based on a difference”. Claim 7 should similar recite “…based on the difference” instead of “the deviation”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites in the second and third when clauses “when an output power at the point of coupling is used as an input adjustment instruction for the power converter, when the phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling within the threshold time is greater than the preset threshold.. ” which as currently presented appear to be two unrelated when clauses. The applicant is encouraged to amend the claim to appropriately tie the second when clause to the third when clause so that they are read as being related to each other instead of separate unrelated clauses. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 12-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over English Machine Translation of applicant cited Tan et al. (CN 103023059 B) in view of Gupta et al. (2021/0006068 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
Tan (Figs.1, 2, 4, 18) teaches a power supply system, comprising at least one new energy power generation device (see fig.1, items 144, 164 pars [0042-0043]), wherein the new energy power generation device comprises a power converter (fig.1, 144, pars [0042-0043]; converter 144 for converting DC voltage into AC voltage) and a control apparatus (figs.1-2, 164, pars [0043-0045]), the power converter is coupled to a power grid (fig.1, item 18, pars [0045-0046]) via a point of coupling (fig.1, par [47]; see any point of coupling between the converter 144 and grid 18), the power converter (144) is configured to convert a direct current into an alternating current under control of the control apparatus (par [0042] and related discussion; converter 144 converts DC into AC under control of control of 164), and the control apparatus is configured to:
obtain a target output parameter of the power converter (figs.2, 4, pars [0045, 0047, 0052]; obtain the target output parameter read on by the power command signal “P-cmd” 212 representing the power output of the converter 144) and an output parameter at the point of coupling (figs.1-2, 4, pars [0047, 0052]; output parameter read on by the power feedback signal “P-fbk” 214 measured at the point of coupling via 34, 36);
output an output voltage phase of the power converter based on a difference between the target output parameter and the output parameter (figs.1-2, 4, par [52]; output voltage phase read on by “Ɵ_cmd” 216 and/or “U-cmd” 232 is output “based on” a difference between the target output parameter 212 and the output parameter 214 noting that this is similar to applicant’s fig.5 output voltage phase of Ɵ1); and
detect a voltage at the point of coupling (see for e.g., figs.1, 18, item 152; pars [0045, 0079, 0085]; feedback voltage “Vfbk” detected at the point of coupling via 36), and adjust the output voltage phase of the power converter when a phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling is greater than a preset threshold (see for e.g., fig.18, pars [0092-0093] and related discussion; Tan teaches the “phase jump calculation unit 418” outputs phase jump correction signal ΔƟpll 422 “in response to the disturbance of a larger signal”, “but does not respond to a smaller disturbance, and does not output phase jump correction signal” and related discussion- that is, the phase jump compensation unit responds to a larger disturbance and outputs the phase jump correction signal when the phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling is greater than a preset threshold and accordingly adjusts the output voltage phase of the converter via Ɵ_cmd1. Examiner Note: the operation shown in fig.18 is similar to applicant’s fig.6).
Tan does not explicitly disclose the phase difference of the voltage is within a threshold time.
Gupta (fig.1), however, teaches it is generally known to take the phase difference of the voltage within a threshold time (pars [0099-0103]; Gupta teaches comparing the phase angle difference of measured voltages to a pre-determined threshold and determining if a phase angle difference of greater than 50 degrees is identified within sampling period of 100 ms. Additionally, Gupta teaches identifying changes of voltage over predefined sampling periods).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Tan’s phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling and have it within a threshold time/a sampling period as discussed within Gupta. The motivation would have been to help distinguish a real persistent phase difference from transient noise or measurement fluctuations.
Regarding Claim 2,
The combination teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 1 and further teaches wherein, when adjusting the output voltage phase of the power converter when the phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling within the threshold time is greater than the preset threshold, the control apparatus is further configured to: obtain a voltage at the point of coupling at a first time point (Tan, for e.g., fig.18, pars [0045, 0079, 0085, 0092-0093] and Gupta, fig.1, pars [0101-0103]; Tan teaches obtaining a voltage “Vfbk” 152 at the point of coupling at a first time point and Gupta teaches obtaining a voltage within a sampling period); obtain a voltage at the point of coupling at a second time point (Tan, for e.g., fig.18, pars [0045, 0079, 0085, 0092-0093] and Gupta, fig.1, pars [0101-0103]; Tan teaches repeated measurements of a voltage “Vfbk” 152 at the point of coupling at a second time point and Gupta in par [103] teaches identifying changes of voltage (i.e., obtaining a voltage at a second time point) over predefined sampling periods)), wherein an interval between the first time point and the second time point is less than the threshold time (Tan, for e.g., fig.18, pars [0045, 0079, 0085, 0092-0093] and Gupta, fig.1, pars [0101-0103]; Gupta teaches taking multiple measurements and within a sampling period- thus, the interval between the two measurements is within the time threshold); and obtain the phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling within the threshold time (Tan, pars [0045, 0079, 0085, 0092-0093] and Gupta, fig.1, pars [0101-0103]; The combination teaches using two detected voltages at point of coupling and obtaining the phase difference within the threshold time/sampling period).
Regarding Claim 3,
The combination teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 1 and further teaches wherein, when adjusting the output voltage phase of the power converter when the phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling within the threshold time is greater than the preset threshold, the control apparatus is further configured to: obtain a three-phase voltage at the point of coupling (Tan, item 152, par [0079]; the three-phase voltage feedback signal 152 at the point of coupling between the inverter and the grid); determine a voltage vector of three-phase voltage (152) in a direct axis-quadrature axis coordinate system corresponding to the output voltage phase output by the control apparatus (pars [0074, 79, 0088-0090, 0093] and related discussion; the d axis- q axis coordinate system 412 determines the d-axis component 414 and q-axis component 416, where the two orthogonal components that specify the voltage vector in the d-q coordinate system. Thus, determining Vd and Vq determines the voltage vector Vdq corresponding to the output voltage phase output as discussed in the rejection of claim 1); determine the phase difference based on the voltage vector (Tan, see fig. 18, pars [0074, 79, 0088-0090, 0092-0093] and rejection of claim 1; Tan teaches the phase jump calculation unit 418 that determines the phase difference “based on” the determined voltage vector via 412, 414, 416); and adjust the output voltage phase of the power converter based on the phase difference (Tan, pars [0074, 79, 0088-0090, 0092-0093] and rejection of claim 1; Tan teaches the “phase jump calculation unit 418” outputs phase jump correction signal ΔƟpll 422 “in response the disturbance of a larger signal”, “but does not respond to a smaller disturbance, and does not output phase jump correction signal.”- that is, the phase jump compensation unit responds to a larger disturbance and outputs the phase jump correction signal when the phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling is greater than a preset threshold and accordingly adjusts the output voltage phase of the converter 144 via Ɵ_cmd1 based on the phase difference).
Regarding Claim 4,
The combination teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 3 and further teaches wherein, when adjusting the output voltage phase of the power converter based on the phase difference, the control apparatus is further configured to: when the phase difference is greater than a first phase threshold (Tan, pars [0092-0093] and related discussion; Tan teaches the “phase jump calculation unit 418” outputs phase jump correction signal ΔƟpll 422 “in response to the disturbance of a larger signal”, “but does not respond to a smaller disturbance, and does not output phase jump correction signal.”- that is, the phase jump compensation unit responds to a larger disturbance and outputs the phase jump correction signal when the phase difference is greater than a first phase threshold), adjust the output voltage phase based on the phase difference (Tan, fig.18, pars [0092-0093] and related discussion, see rejection of claim 1; Tan teaches the “phase jump calculation unit 418” outputs phase jump correction signal ΔƟpll 422 “in response to the disturbance of a larger signal” and accordingly adjusts the output voltage via Ɵ_cmd1 based on the phase difference), wherein an adjustment value is the phase difference (Tan, fig. 18, pars [0092-0093] and related discussion; Tan teaches the adjustment value is the phase difference ΔƟpll filtered and provided to the adder 438); or when the phase difference is less than a first phase threshold, increase the output voltage phase by a preset first value (limitation written in the alternative and not required to be read into the claim).
The combination, in particular Tan, suggests the first phase threshold is greater than zero, because it detects the phase jump correction signal is in response to “a disturbance of a larger signal” as opposed to “a smaller disturbance” (Tan, par [0093]). Tan, however, does not explicitly disclose the phase threshold is greater than 0.
Gupta teaches it is known in the art to have a phase threshold be greater than zero (par [0102]; if a phase angle difference of greater than 50 degrees is identified within a sampling period, then an action is taken. Thus, the phase threshold is 50 greater than 0).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Tan to that of Gupta to have the first phase threshold be greater than 0. The motivation would have been an obvious design choice in that a first phase threshold above zero avoids responding to insignificant phase differences and improves stability and responsiveness of the system.
Regarding Claim 5,
The combination teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 1 and Tan suggests the preset threshold is greater than zero, because it detects the phase jump correction signal is in response to “a disturbance of a larger signal” as opposed to “a smaller disturbance” (Tan, par [0093]). Tan, however, does not explicitly disclose that the preset threshold is greater than 0.
Gupta teaches it is known in the art to have a preset phase threshold be greater than zero (par [0102]; if a phase angle difference of greater than 50 degrees is identified within a sampling period, then an action is taken. Thus, the phase threshold is 50 greater than 0).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Tan to that of Gupta to have the preset threshold be greater than 0. The motivation would have been an obvious design choice in that a preset threshold above zero avoids responding to insignificant phase differences and improves stability and responsiveness of the system.
Regarding Claim 6,
The combination teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 1 and Tan further teaches wherein an output parameter of the power converter at the point of coupling is any one of the following parameters: an active power output by the power converter (Tan, figs.1-2, 4, pars [0007-0008, 0047, 0052]; the output parameter is the active power output by the power converter measured by the power feedback “P_fbk” via the current and voltage at the output terminal of the converter), an active current output by the power converter (not required to be read into the claim because of the “any one of” recitation), a direct current voltage on a direct current side of the power converter (not required to be read into the claim because of the “any one of” recitation), and a square value of the direct current voltage (not required to be read into the claim because of the “any one of” recitation).
Regarding Claim 7,
The combination teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 1 and Tan further teaches wherein, when outputting the output voltage phase of the power converter based on the deviation between the target output parameter and the output parameter, the control apparatus is further configured to: obtain a parameter deviation based on the deviation between the target output parameter and the output parameter (Tan, figs.2, 4, item 252, par [52]; parameter deviation read by the power error signal 252 which is a deviation between the target output parameter 212 and the output parameter 214); obtain an output frequency based on the parameter deviation (Tan, figs.2, 4, item 262, par [52]; output frequency 262 “based on” the parameter deviation); obtain an output phase based on the output frequency (Tan, figs.2, 4, item 216, par [52]; output phase read on by the output phase command signal 216 based on the output frequency 262); and output the output voltage phase of the power converter by modulating the output phase by the power converter (Tan, par [0069]; Tan teaches the power converter 144’s semiconductor switches are controlled by pulse width modulation and thus the output voltage phase is output by modulating the output phase by the power converter).
Regarding Claim 12,
The combination teaches the claimed subject matter in claim 1 and further teaches wherein when the phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling within the threshold time is greater than the preset threshold (Tan, pars [0092-0093] and related discussion, Gupta, pars [0100-0103]; see rejection of claim 1), an output impedance of the power converter is greater than 0 (Tan, pars [0007-0008, 0037, 0047-0048, 0092-0093] and related discussion, Gupta, pars [0100-0103]; Modified Tan teaches the condition of the phase difference being greater than the threshold as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 and further teaches that the power converter output is adjusted based on voltage feedback, current feedback (i.e., the power feedback), a power command signal that would result in the converter to have an output impedance greater than 0 noting that the claim is written narratively and does not further recite any narrowing limitations that would cause the converter to have an output impedance greater than 0); when an output power at the point of coupling is used as an input adjustment instruction for the power converter (Tan, figs.2, 4, pars [0045, 0047, 0052]; Tan teaches the output power “P-cmd” 212 representing the power output of the converter 144 and/or the power feedback signal “P-fbk” 214 measured at the point of coupling via 34, 36 as adjustment instructions for the power converter), when the phase difference of the voltage at the point of coupling within the threshold time is greater than the preset threshold (Tan, pars [0092-0093] and related discussion, Gupta, pars [0100-0103]; see rejection of claim 1), the output impedance of the power converter changes from greater than 0 to less than 0 in a first time period (Tan, figs.2, 4, 18, pars [0045, 0047-0048, 0052, 0092-0093], Gupta, fig.1, pars [0100-0103]; Modified Tan teaches using the output power feedback, voltage and current feedbacks as an input to adjust the power converter and when there is a large disturbance/phase difference greater than the threshold, the output voltage phase of the converter is adjusted, resulting in modified Tan’s power converter 144’s output impedance reacting in the same claimed manner in which the impedance changes from greater than 0 to less than 0 in an undefined first time period noting that the claim is narratively and passively written and does not further recite distinguishing structural limitations that would cause the impedance of the converter to change to less than 0).
Regarding Claim 13,
The combination of Tan in view of Gupta teaches the apparatus necessary to complete the recited method steps in claim 13 as discussed above in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 14,
Claim 14 recites the same limitations as discussed above in the rejection of claim 2 and is therefore rejected in the same fashion.
Regarding Claim 15,
Claim 15 recites the same limitations as discussed above in the rejection of claim 3 and is therefore rejected in the same fashion.
Regarding Claim 16,
Claim 16 recites the same limitations as discussed above in the rejection of claim 4 and is therefore rejected in the same fashion.
Regarding Claim 17,
Claim 17 recites the same limitations as discussed above in the rejection of claim 5 and is therefore rejected in the same fashion.
Regarding Claim 18,
Claim 18 recites the same limitations as discussed above in the rejection of claim 6 and is therefore rejected in the same fashion.
Regarding Claim 19,
Claim 19 recites the same limitations as discussed above in the rejection of claim 7 and is therefore rejected in the same fashion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9, 20 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 dependent claim 8, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, does not teach the limitations of “when obtaining the parameter deviation based on the deviation between the target output parameter and the output parameter, the control apparatus is further configured to: adjust the parameter deviation based on a quadrature-axis component of a voltage vector and a preset first proportional coefficient.” The aforementioned limitations in combination with the limitations in claim 7 renders the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Claim 9 depends on claim 8 and is therefore indicated as allowable for similar reasons.
With respect to dependent claim 20, which is similar to claim 8, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, does not teach the limitations “wherein obtaining the parameter deviation based on the deviation between the target output parameter and the output parameter further comprises: adjusting the parameter deviation based on a quadrature-axis component of a voltage vector and a preset first proportional coefficient.” The aforementioned limitations in combination with the limitations in claim 19 renders the claim non-obvious over the prior art of record.
Reference of Note
The prior art of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Jiang (2017/0194793), pars [68, 73]; Jiang teaches detecting whether the voltage of the grid and output voltage of the inverter exceed a voltage threshold and adjusting the output voltage of the converter. Additionally, Jiang teaches the phase voltage of the converter and the grid being consistent means the phase difference falls within a preset range.
Tan (2011/0075456), figs.1 and 5, pars [16, 25-26]; Tan teaches the PLL circuit 32 receives instantaneous voltage signal 40 and generates a synchronized frequency phase signal. The phase compensation circuit (64) tracks instantaneous phase of the grid voltage and compares it to the synchronized phase signal to generate a phase displacement (i.e., phase difference) 70 and transmitting a phase correction signal 66/74 when the phase difference exceeds a threshold value.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASEM MOURAD whose telephone number is (571)270-7770. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6.
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 at (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 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.
/RASEM MOURAD/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/Menatoallah Youssef/SPE, Art Unit 2836
