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 4 and 6 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “a plurality of operating modes” subsequently the claim recites “a sixth mode” it is unclear if five other distinct modes are required or merely two modes required. Similarly, the claim recites “a fourth current range” here again it is unclear if four different ranges are required by the claim. Applicant should amend the claim to recite “selectively execute a plurality of modes including a first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth mode of operation depending on a total value of output currents….” and provide a similar amendment to the current range limitation.
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 1 and 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koketsu (JP 2018157737) (see attached machine translation) in view of Blinov et al. (US 20240063723).
With respect to claim 1 Koketsu teaches a high-voltage battery (50);
a low-voltage battery (55, see 12vdc) having a nominal voltage lower than a nominal voltage of the high-voltage battery, the low-voltage battery being electrically connected to the load (60);
a first converter (20) electrically connected between (see connection in Fig. 1) the high battery and the low-voltage battery, the first converter being configured to perform voltage conversion between the high-voltage battery and the low-voltage battery;
a second converter (30) electrically connected between (see connection in Fig. 1) the high-voltage battery and the low-voltage battery, the second converter being configured to perform voltage conversion between (see placement in Fig. 1) the high-voltage battery and the low-voltage battery, the second converter having rated electric power lower (see first embodiment description paragraph 13) than rated electric power of the first converter; and
a control device (10) that controls operations of the first converter (20) and the second converter (30), wherein: the control device is configured to selectively execute a plurality of operation modes (see voltage range of operation between 20 and 30 or sharing operations or sharing settings)
and the operation modes include: a first operation mode (1DDC in operation) that is selectable when the total value of the output currents falls within a first current range, the first operation mode being an operation mode in which only the first converter supplies the electric power (see when DDC is not operated paragraph 0010); a second operation mode that is selectable when the total value of the output currents falls within a second current range (paragraph 0013 first DDC is not operated) that is lower than the first current range, the second operation mode being an operation mode in which only the second converter supplies the electric power. Koketsu does not teach the use of a third mode of operation in which the electric power supply from the first converter and the second converter is not performed. Blinov teaches (paragraph 0026) the use of a third mode of operation where electric power supply from the first converter and the second converter is not performed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Koketsu include the known use of not performing conversion for the benefit of increased efficiency.
With respect to claim 4 Koketsu teaches an electric power supply system for supplying electric power to a load, the electric power supply system comprising:
a high-voltage battery (50);
a low-voltage battery (55, see 12vdc) having a nominal voltage lower than a nominal voltage of the high-voltage battery, the low-voltage battery being electrically connected to the load (60);
a first converter (20) electrically connected between (see connection in Fig. 1) the high battery and the low-voltage battery, the first converter being configured to perform voltage conversion between the high-voltage battery and the low-voltage battery;
a second converter (30) electrically connected between (see connection in Fig. 1) the high-voltage battery and the low-voltage battery, the second converter being configured to perform voltage conversion between (see placement in Fig. 1) the high-voltage battery and the low-voltage battery, the second converter having rated electric power lower (see first embodiment description paragraph 13) than rated electric power of the first converter; and
a control device (10) that controls operations of the first converter (20) and the second converter (30), wherein: the control device is configured to selectively execute a plurality of operation modes (see voltage range of operation between 20 and 30 or sharing operations or sharing settings) depending on a total value of output currents of the first converter and the second converter; and the operation modes include a sixth operation mode that is selectable when the total value of the output currents falls within a fourth current range, the sixth operation mode being an operation mode in which electric power supply from the first converter and the second converter is not performed.
Koketsu does not teach the use of a sixth mode of operation in which the electric power supply from the first converter and the second converter is not performed. Blinov teaches (paragraph 0026) the use of a sixth mode of operation where electric power supply from the first converter and the second converter is not performed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Koketsu include the known use of not performing conversion for the benefit of increased efficiency.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 and 5 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.
With respect to claim 2 Koketsu teaches the use of a power supply system however does not teach the control device is configured to prohibit execution of the third operation mode regardless of the total value of the output currents when a deterioration index of the low-voltage battery falls within a predetermined deterioration range. At least this further limitation is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record.
With respect to claim 3 Koketsu teaches the use of a power supply system however does not teach the operation modes further include: a fourth operation mode that is selectable when the total value of the output currents falls within the third current range, the fourth operation mode being an operation mode in which only the first converter intermittently supplies the electric power; and a fifth operation mode that is selectable when the total value of the output currents falls within the third current range, the fifth operation mode being an operation mode in which the second converter supplies the electric power and the first converter intermittently supplies the electric power; and the control device is configured to execute any one of the fourth operation mode and the fifth operation mode depending on a degree of deterioration indicated by the deterioration index when the deterioration index of the low-voltage battery falls within the deterioration range. At least this further limitation is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record.
With respect to claim 5 Koketsu teaches the use of a power supply system however does not teach control device is configured to execute a deterioration determination process of calculating any one or more of an internal resistance of the low-voltage battery and a capacitance of the low-voltage battery as the deterioration index of the low-voltage battery; the control device is configured to further operate the second converter when the deterioration determination process is executed during execution of the first operation mode to supply a charging current or a discharging current to the low-voltage battery; and the control device is configured to further operate the first converter when the deterioration determination process is executed during execution of the second operation mode to supply the charging current or the discharging current to the low-voltage battery. At least this further limitation is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record.
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.”
Conclusion
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