Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 15, 2026
Application No. 19/154,655

DC FAST-CHARGING BIDIRECTIONAL CONVERTER UTILIZING AN EXISTING E-MOTOR AND INVERTER

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 07, 2025
Priority
Feb 15, 2023 — provisional 63/445,737 +1 more
Examiner
FIN, MICHAEL RUTLAND
Art Unit
2836
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Magna Powertrain of America Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 4m
Est. Remaining
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
516 granted / 644 resolved
+12.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
666
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
47.5%
+7.5% vs TC avg
§102
28.7%
-11.3% vs TC avg
§112
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 644 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 16-17 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. New Claims 16 and 17 recite the limitation “single-phase DC supply” however it is unclear what is required. As single-phase typically refers to an AC supply. Applicant should clarify the claim. Claim Rejections - 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, 5-6, 10-12 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Prasad et al. (US 20230365016). With respect to claims 1, 5-6, 10-11 and 16-17 Prasad teaches an electrical system, comprising: an energy storage device (210); a traction motor (Fig. 2-4 see setting windings for propulsion mode) having a plurality of machine windings (see Fig. 2-4); a power inverter (220) connected to the energy storage device (210) for receiving direct current (DC) power therefrom, the power inverter including a plurality of pairs of semiconductor switches (IS1-6), each pair of semiconductor switches of the plurality of pairs of semiconductor switches being configured to apply an alternating current (AC) power to a corresponding machine winding (see windings for example Fig. 2-4) of the plurality of machine windings; an external power source (Parsad teaches two external sources 140/130 either of which are capable of suppling external power); and a mode control switch (S5) connected between a given machine winding of the plurality of machine windings (see connection with machine windings in Fig. 3 and 4) and a corresponding pair of semiconductor switches see connection with IS switches shown in Fig. 3) of the pairs of semiconductor switches, wherein the mode control switch is operable in a closed state to allow current flow therethrough, and wherein the mode control switch is operable in an open state to prevent current flow between the external power source and the corresponding pair of semiconductor switches (see default or propulsion mode of operation), wherein the given machine winding (for example B1) of the plurality of machine windings is further arranged to receive current from the external power source via a conductor when the mode control switch is in the open state (for example during a AC charging operation see Table 1). With respect to claim 6 Prasad teaches the energy storage device has a first voltage (800v) and the external power source has a second voltage (400v) that is substantially lower than the first voltage. With respect to claim 12 Parsad teaches the power converter mode includes operating the electrical system in a boost mode (paragraph 0034) to transfer power from the external power source and to the energy storage device. 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. Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prasad in view of Kusch et al. (US 20130307489). With respect to claims 7 and 14 Prasad teaches the connection with an external source however does not teach polarity control. Kusch teaches the known use of a polarity control switch (rectifier switching operations paragraph 0043) connected between the external power source and the given machine winding of the plurality of machine windings, wherein the electrical system is configured to cause the polarity control switch to block current therethrough in response to the external power source being connected with an incorrect polarity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Prasad include a polarity switch for the predictable result of protecting the electrical system from damage. Claims 8-9, 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prasad in view of Smolenaers (US 20200298722). With respect to claim 8 Parsad teaches the converter however does not teach a startup operation. Smolenaers teaches a converter startup switch (paragraph 0065, 80 and 89-81 connected between the external power source and the given machine winding of the plurality of machine windings, wherein the electrical system is configured to cause the converter startup switch to progressively increase a current flow therethrough over a predetermined period of time. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Prasad to include the use of a startup switch for the benefit of increased safety and reduced abnormal or transient operations. With respect to claim 9 Parsad teaches the converter however does not an inductor connected to the external power source. Smolenaers teaches an inductor (1320) connected between the external power source and the given machine winding of the plurality of machine windings. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Parsad to include the known use of an inductor for the predictable result of filtering the input (paragraph 0210). With respect to claim 13 Parsad teaches operating the electrical system however does not teach a buck mode. Smolenaers in the power converter mode includes operating the electrical system in a buck mode (paragraph 0207) to transfer power from the energy storage device and to the external power source. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Parsad to include the use of a buck mode for the predictable result of improved voltage regulation for the external source. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-4 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 2 Prasad teaches the electrical control system however does not teach wherein the electrical system is configured to cause the mode control switch to be in the closed state for operating the inverter to apply the alternating current (AC) power to the corresponding machine winding and to cause the traction motor to generate a torque, and wherein the electrical system is configured to cause the mode control switch to be in the open state for operating the electrical system in a power converter mode to transfer power between the energy storage device and the external power source. At least this further limitation is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Smolenaers (US 20240030856) teaches an control of current to motor windings and switching operations relevant to the claimed system, Zhang et al. (US 20220216714) teaches a switch mode switch (60) for controlling the mode of an inverter. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Fin whose telephone number is (571)272-5921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30. 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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7429. 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. MICHAEL FIN Primary Examiner Art Unit 2836 /MICHAEL R. FIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 07, 2025
Application Filed
Aug 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12695284
HIGH-SPEED FAULT ISOLATION FOR POWER SOURCES OF A VEHICLE
2y 2m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12686485
COMPOSITE FUSELAGE BARREL WITH IMPROVED EME PROTECTION AND METHOD OF MAKING THEREOF
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12683424
CHARGER FOR A BATTERY PACK, CHARGING SYSTEM AND METHOD OF CHARGING
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12676513
POWER TRANSFER DISABLEMENT SWITCH IN A WIRELESS POWER RECEPTION APPARATUS
2y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12676470
OVER VOLTAGE PROTECTION FOR A WIRELESS POWER TRANSFER SYSTEM
1y 10m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+13.1%)
2y 4m (~1y 4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 644 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month