Office Action 3: Notice of Allowance (2025-03-10)

CLAIMS:
AMENDMENTS TO THE CLAIMS:

This listing of claims will replace all prior versions, and listings, of claims in the application:

LISTING OF CLAIMS:


1\. (Currently Amended) A device for processing a pilot control signal, the device comprising:
a voltage doubler;and
 a comparator,
the pilot control signal having at least two modes: a continuous mode in which the pilot control signal comprises a continuous signal or an alternating mode in which the pilot control signal comprises an alternating PWM signal, and
the comparator outputs a binary detection signal based on an input of the pilot control signal to the voltage doubler, a state of the binary detection signal being an indication of the mode of the pilot control signal.

2\. (Previously Presented) The device as claimed in claim 1, in which the pilot control signal is as defined by the standard IEC 61851.

3\. (Previously Presented) The device as claimed in claim 1, in which the voltage doubler is a Greinacher voltage doubler.

4\. (Previously Presented) The device as claimed in claim 3, in which the Greinacher voltage doubler comprises a first capacitor, of which a first terminal is connected to

an input of the voltage doubler and of the device capable of receiving the pilot control signal, a first diode, of which the anode is connected to ground (Gnd) and the cathode is connected to a second terminal of the first capacitor, a second diode, of which the anode is connected to the cathode of the first diode and the cathode is connected to an output of the voltage doubler, a second capacitor, of which a first terminal is connected to the output of the voltage doubler and a second terminal is connected to ground, and a resistor, of which a first terminal is connected to the output of the voltage doubler and a second terminal is connected to ground.

5\. (Previously Presented) The device as claimed in claim 1, in which the comparator comprises a Zener diode, of which the cathode is connected to the output of the voltage doubler and to the input of the comparator.

6\. (Previously Presented) A device for processing a pilot control signal having at least two modes: a continuous mode in which the pilot control signal comprises a continuous signal or an alternating mode in which the pilot control signal comprises an alternating PWM signal, and capable of generating a binary detection signal, the state of which is an indication of the mode, the device comprising:
a voltage doubler; and
a comparator,
the comparator further comprising:
a Zener diode, the cathode of which is connected to the output of the voltage doubler and to the input of the comparator, and
a first transistor of NPN type, the base of which is connected to the anode of the Zener diode and the emitter is connected to ground, and a second transistor of PNP type, the base of

which is connected to the collector of the first transistor, the emitter is connected to a supply voltage and the collector is connected to the output of the comparator and of the device and generates the detection signal.

7\. (Previously Presented) An application of waking up a computer for an electric vehicle, when the electric vehicle is connected to an active charging station using a device for processing a pilot control signal having at least two modes: a continuous mode in which the pilot control signal comprises a continuous signal or an alternating mode in which the pilot control signal comprises an alternating PWM signal, and capable of generating a binary detection signal, the state of which is an indication of the mode, the device comprising a voltage doubler and a comparator.

OFFICE ACTION:
REASONS FOR ALLOWANCE
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the previous prior art rejections under 35 USC 102(a)(1) based on Nakahara et al and Jinno et al are now withdrawn by the examiner in view of applicant’s arguments set forth in the remarks filed on 01/23/25, which arguments are deemed to be persuasive by the examiner, i.e., the examiner fully agrees with applicant’s arguments regarding the claimed pilot control signal not being merely intended use, and therefore the anticipation rejections of claims 1-5 based on Nakahara et al and Jinno et al are no longer applicable against these claims.
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.”

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKS/ARGUMENTS Claims 1-7 are pending. Claims 1-5 stand rejected. Applicant acknowledges with appreciation the indication that claims 6 and 7 are allowed. In this response claim 1 is amended to address the informality objection below. No new matter is added. Objection to the Claims Claim 1 is objected to for informalities. Applicant herein amends claim 1 in accordance with the Examiner's helpful suggestions. Withdrawal of the objection is respectfully requested. Examiner's Response to Applicant's Previous Amendment and Examiner Interview Applicant acknowledges with appreciation the courtesies extended to Applicant's representative during the telephone interview of January 31, 2025. During that interview, applicant's representative pointed out that, contrary to the statement set forth in the Final Office Action at page 2, paragraph 1, applicant did indeed provide arguments against the previously applied prior art. The Examiner readily acknowledged the oversight and stated that, upon filing of a formal response to the Final Office Action, the Examiner would fully consider applicant's traversal of the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1-4 as anticipated by Nakahara et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,229,818), and the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1-3 and 5 as anticipated by Jinno et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0008629). In view of Applicant's previous arguments, withdrawal of these rejections and allowance of claims 1-5 are respectfully requested. Applicant further submits that, if Applicant's previous arguments are found to be persuasive, resulting in the withdrawal of the aforementioned rejections, any new rejection(s) based on not previously applied prior art must be set forth in a Non-final Office Action. In view of the amendments and remarks set forth above, applicant submits that this application is in condition for allowance which action is respectfully requested. The Director is hereby authorized to charge any fees that may be due, and to credit any overpayment to Deposit Account No. 02-4800. Respectfully submitted, BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC Date February 24, 2025 By: /Jacques L. Etkowicz/ Jacques L. Etkowicz Registration No. 41738 Customer No. 23122T 610 407 0700