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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 12/16/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 13, 21 and 30 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hermann et al. (US 2012/0105015) herein after Hermann.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 2, 4-5, 7-12, 21, 23-26, 30, 31, 33, 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porat (US 2004/0173542) and Hermann (US 2012/0105015).
Regarding claim 1, Porat discloses a system for a battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment (figs. 1, 2), comprising:
a sensing circuit to detect the presence of water (a water sensing shut-off switch can also be incorporated into the circuitry in the event that water is admitted into the interior of the housing, paragraph [0012]), wherein the sensing circuit is disposed within the battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment (Water-sensitive electrical shut-off switches can also be incorporated in housings 111, paragraph [0046]); a power circuit electrically connected to the sensing circuit (65 is connected to the battery 72, fig. 2) and configured to direct power from one or more batteries to an electrical load (the robotic pool cleaner 100 has no battery and receives its motive power from rechargeable batteries 72 located in the floating platform 10 via power cable 90, paragraph [0055] the battery 72 provide power to the load (pool cleaner 100)), wherein the power circuit is disposed within the battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment (abstract, figs. 1, 2);
Porat further discloses that the power shut-off switch 65 can be activated by the incursion of water in the battery compartment 60 (paragraph [0042]). However, Porat does not disclose that a crowbar circuit electrically connected to the sensing circuit and the power circuit, and configured to:
receive an input voltage from the sensing circuit; and open crowbar circuit based on the input voltage to allow an electrical current flow to cause a short circuit in the system that permanently disables isolates the one or more batteries from the power circuit thereby preventing charging of the one or more batteries, wherein the crowbar circuit is disposed within the battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment.
a crowbar circuit electrically connected to the sensing circuit and the power circuit, and configured to: receive an input voltage from the sensing circuit; and open crowbar circuit based on the input voltage to allow an electrical current flow to cause a short circuit in the system that permanently disables isolates the one or more batteries from the power circuit thereby preventing charging of the one or more batteries, wherein the crowbar circuit is disposed within the battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment (monitoring the charger output voltage, wherein if the voltage exceeds a predetermined trigger voltage the OPD performs the step of creating a short between the first and second output terminals of the battery pack, causing a fuse corresponding to the battery pack to blow, paragraph [0007] where the OPD can be a crowbar circuit).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 2, Porat Hermann discloses the system of claim 1. Hermann further discloses wherein the system further comprises a fuse (103 connected to 113, fig. 6) electrically connected between the power circuit and the Crowbar, and wherein the short circuit causes the fuse to blow (paragraph [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 4, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 1. Porat further discloses wherein the sensing circuit, the power circuit, and the disabling circuit are formed on a single circuit board (paragraph [0053]-[0054]). However, Porat does not explicitly disclose that the disabling circuit is a crowbar circuit.
Hermann discloses the disabling circuit is a crowbar circuit (paragraph [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 5, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 1. Porat further discloses the system wherein the one or more batteries (72, fig. 2) electrically connected to the power circuit and the disabling circuit (65, fig. 2;), the power source configured to power the electrical load (paragraph [0041]-[0042]). However, Porat does not explicitly disclose that the disabling circuit is a crowbar circuit.
Hermann discloses the disabling circuit is a crowbar circuit (paragraph [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 7, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 1. Porat further discloses wherein the one or more batteries are rechargeable (paragraph [0045]).
Regarding claim 8, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 5. Porat further discloses wherein the sensing circuit is further configured to detect the presence of water at the one or more batteries (a water sensing shut-off switch can also be incorporated into the circuitry in the event that water is admitted into the interior of the housing, paragraph [0012]).
Regarding claim 9, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 5. Porat further discloses wherein the one or more batteries from the power circuit from electrically disconnects the one or more batteries from the electrical load, thereby preventing discharging of the one or more batteries (paragraph [0042] where shutoff switch disconnect the battery from the load).
Regarding claim 10, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 5. Porat further discloses wherein the battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment further comprises an underwater device comprising a compartment that defines an interior volume, and wherein the sensing circuit, the power circuit, the disabling circuit, and the power source are disposed within the interior volume (the whole power circuit with the electrical component is in the cavity 60, fig. 2). However, Porat does not explicitly disclose that the disabling circuit is a crowbar circuit.
Hermann discloses the disabling circuit is a crowbar circuit (paragraph [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 11, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 10. Porat further discloses wherein the sensing circuit is further configured to detect the presence of water within the interior volume (paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 12, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 10. Porat further discloses wherein the compartment is sealed against water ingress (paragraph [0021]).
Regarding claim 21, Porat discloses a battery-powered underwater pool cleaning device (figs. 1, 2), comprising:
a compartment (60, fig, 2) that defines an interior volume;
a power source (72, fig. 2) disposed within the interior volume and configured to power the battery-powered underwater pool cleaning device (paragraph [0019]), wherein the power source comprises one or more batteries (two batteries 72, fig. 2); and
circuitry electrically connected to the power source via an electrical connection and disposed within the interior volume ( Electrical conductors 70 are joined to conventional circuitry for powering the audio components 30 and 40, and other electrical components, such as the lights 37, paragraph [0041]. Where the electrical conductors are also connected to power shutoff switch 64, fig. 2), wherein the circuitry comprises a crowbar circuit, and wherein the circuitry is configured to:
detect the presence of water in the interior volume (Water-sensitive electrical shut-off switches can also be incorporated in housings 111 and 60 to avoid damage to the ozonator circuitry and battery, paragraph [0046]);However, Porat does not explicitly disclose the circuitry comprises a crowbar circuit and generate an input voltage to allow an electrical current to flow to cause a short circuit in the circuitry; and disable the power to the battery-powered underwater pool cleaning device based on the short circuit, thereby permanently disabling the electrical connection between the power source and the circuitry.
Hermann discloses the circuitry comprises a crowbar circuit and generate an input voltage to allow an electrical current to flow to cause a short circuit in the circuitry; and disable the power to the battery-powered underwater pool cleaning device based on the short circuit, thereby permanently disabling the electrical connection between the power source and the circuitry(monitoring the charger output voltage, wherein if the voltage exceeds a predetermined trigger voltage the OPD performs the step of creating a short between the first and second output terminals of the battery pack, causing a fuse corresponding to the battery pack to blow, paragraph [0007] where the OPD can be a crowbar circuit).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
. Regarding claim 23, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 21. Porat further discloses wherein the compartment is sealed against water ingress (paragraph [0021]).
Regarding claim 24, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 21. Porat further discloses wherein the circuitry comprises: a sensing circuit (65, fig. 2)to detect the presence of water in the interior volume (paragraph [0042]); Porat further discloses a power circuit electrically connected to the sensing circuit (72 is electrically connected to the power shutoff switch 64, fig. 2) and configured to direct power from the power source to power the battery-powered underwater pool cleaning device (paragraph [0055]). Although, Porat discloses a battery powered pool cleaning device, however, Porat is silent over a crowbar circuit electrically connected to the sensing circuit and the power circuit, and configured to disable the power to the battery.
Hermann discloses a crowbar circuit electrically connected to the sensing circuit and the power circuit, and configured to disable the power to the battery (monitoring the charger output voltage, wherein if the voltage exceeds a predetermined trigger voltage the OPD performs the step of creating a short between the first and second output terminals of the battery pack, causing a fuse corresponding to the battery pack to blow, paragraph [0007] where the OPD can be a crowbar circuit).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 25, Porat in view of Herman discloses the system of claim 21. Porat further discloses wherein the compartment comprises a divider (62, fig. 2) that divides the interior volume into a first interior sub-volume and a second interior sub-volume (Waterproof battery storage compartment 60 is accessed by closure 62, which in the embodiment shown is joined to the housing 12 by hinges 64 and secured by one or more latches 66, paragraph [0041)).
Regarding claim 26, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 25. Porat further discloses wherein the power source is disposed within the first interior sub-volume (the battery 72 is in the first interior volume, fig. 2) and the circuitry (the connector 116 and the water sensitive electrical shut off switches are also in the housing 111, paragraph [0046], fig. 2) is disposed within the second interior sub-volume, and wherein the circuitry is configured to detect the presence of water in the first interior sub- volume (water-sensitive electrical shut-off switches can also be incorporated in housings 111 and 60 to avoid damage to the ozonator circuitry and battery, paragraph [00460] the water sensitive switches are present to detect the water in the housing).
Regarding claim 30, Porat discloses a method for a battery-powered swimming pool cleaners or other swimming pool cleaning equipment (abstract, fig. 2), comprising:
detecting water intrusion within a compartment of the battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment (paragraph [0012]); Porat further discloses a power circuit responsive to detecting the water intrusion, activating a disabling circuit (safety shut-off switch 65 that can be activated by the incursion of water in the battery compartment 60, paragraph [0042]).
However, Porat does not explicitly disclose a crowbar circuit configured to: receive an input voltage from a sensing circuit; and open the crowbar circuit based on the input voltage to allow an electrical current flow to cause a short circuit that causes an interrupting circuit to interrupt flow of electricity from a battery of the battery-powered device, thereby permanently disabling an electrical connection between the battery and a power circuit.
Hermann discloses a crowbar circuit configured to: receive an input voltage from a sensing circuit; and open the crowbar circuit based on the input voltage to allow an electrical current flow to cause a short circuit that causes an interrupting circuit to interrupt flow of electricity from a battery of the battery-powered device, thereby permanently disabling an electrical connection between the battery and a power circuit (monitoring the charger output voltage, wherein if the voltage exceeds a predetermined trigger voltage the OPD performs the step of creating a short between the first and second output terminals of the battery pack, causing a fuse corresponding to the battery pack to blow, paragraph [0007] where the OPD can be a crowbar circuit).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 31, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the method of claim 30. Herman further discloses wherein interrupting circuit comprises a fuse (113, fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 33, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the method of claim 30. Hermann further discloses wherein the input voltage comprises a value that exceeds a disabling threshold associated with the crowbar circuit (paragraph [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 35, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 31. Hermann further discloses wherein activating the crowbar circuit to cause the interrupting circuit to interrupt the flow of electricity from the battery comprises electrically isolating the battery, thereby preventing the battery from discharging or charging (paragraph [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Claim(s) 3, 13, 16, 20, 27, 28, 32is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porat (US 2004/0173542), and Hermann (US 2012/0105015) as applied to claims 1, 21 and 30 above, and further in view of Stieb (US 2011/0162727).
Regarding claim 3, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the system of claim 1. However, They do not explicitly disclose the sensing circuit comprises one or more probe sets.
Stieb discloses wherein the sensing circuit comprises one or more probe sets (water sensor 20 has a positive terminal fastener 28, a and a negative terminal fastener 29, fig. 2, paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s water sensor in view of Hermann to include the probe kind of water sensor as taught by Stieb, in order to detect the presence of water more precisely.
Regarding claim 13, Porat discloses a circuit board for a battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment (Abstract, fig. 1), comprising:
a sensing circuit comprising to detect the presence of a liquid (a water sensing shut-off switch can also be incorporated into the circuitry in the event that water is admitted into the interior of the housing, paragraph [0012]) within a compartment of the battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment (65 is disposed inside the compartment 60, fig. 2);
a power circuit to receive power from one or more batteries and power an electrical load of the battery-powered swimming pool cleaning equipment (paragraph [0041]);
an electrical interrupter (65, fig. 2) to interrupt flow of electricity to the power circuit (platform is also provided with a safety shut-off switch 65 that can be activated by the incursion of water in the battery compartment 60, paragraph [0042]); Although Porat discloses battery powered swimming pool cleaners. However, Porat is silent about the sensing circuit comprising a pair of probes and a crowbar circuit to open responsive to receiving an input voltage to allow electrical current flow to cause a short circuit in that permanently isolates the one or more batteries from the power circuit thereby preventing charging of the one or more batteries.
Stieb discloses the sensing circuit comprising a pair of probes (a positive wire terminal 26, a negative wire terminal 27, fig. 2, paragraph [0012]). Stieb further discloses a crowbar circuit (the protection circuit 50, fig. 4) to open responsive to receiving an input voltage to allow electrical current flow to cause the electrical interrupter to interrupt the flow of electricity to the power circuit responsive to receiving a signal from the sensing circuit (the circuit 70 detect the leakage of water and send signals to main circuit 50 having the protection element to cut off the power supply to powered the humidifier, paragraph [0014] ).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s water sensor to include the probe kind of water sensor with a crowbar circuit, in order to detect the presence of water precisely and protect the circuit with low power dissipation from water damage.
Hermann discloses a crowbar circuit to open responsive to receiving an input voltage to allow electrical current flow to cause a short circuit in that permanently isolates the one or more batteries from the power circuit thereby preventing charging of the one or more batteries(paragraph [0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Porat to include the crowbar circuit with the sensing circuit as taught by Hermann, in order to have irreversible battery isolation in response to overvoltage conditions, ensuring permanent prevention of recharging in a submerged battery-powered pool cleaning device, even in the event of control circuit failure.
Regarding claim 16, Porat in view of Stieb and Hermann discloses the circuit board of claim 13. Porat is silent over the pair of probes is formed as a pair of traces in the circuit board.
Stieb discloses wherein the pair of probes is formed as a pair of traces in the circuit board (the wires 26 and 27 are conducting signal and can be equivalent to the traces on the circuit board, paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s water sensor to include the probe kind of water sensor as taught by Stieb, in order to detect the presence of water more precisely.
Regarding claim 20, Porat in view of Stieb and Hermann discloses the circuit board of claim 13. They are silent over wherein the crowbar circuit comprises a switching circuit and a resistor electrically connected between the electrical interrupter and the sensing circuit.
Stieb discloses wherein the crowbar circuit comprises a switching circuit (a detection activating switch 62, fig. 4) and a resistor (resistor 61, fig. 4) electrically connected between the electrical interrupter and the sensing circuit (paragraph [0014]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s in view of Hermann to include the crowbar protection circuit as taught by Stieb, in order to protect the circuit with low power dissipation.
Regarding claim 27, Porat in view of Hermann discloses battery-powered underwater pool cleaning device of claim 25. However, they are silent over wherein the circuitry comprises a sensing circuit and other circuits the sensing circuit comprising a pair of probes configured to detect the presence of water at a location that is spaced apart from the other circuits.
Stieb discloses wherein the circuitry comprises a sensing circuit (the detection circuit 70, fig. 4) and other circuits (main circuit 50, fig. 4), the sensing circuit comprising a pair of probes configured to detect the presence of water at a location that is spaced apart from the other circuits (see the annotated fig below).
PNG
media_image1.png
775
1098
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s water sensor in view of Hermann to include the probe kind of water sensor as taught by Stieb, in order to detect the presence of water more precisely.
Regarding claim 28, Porat in view of Hermann discloses battery-powered underwater pool cleaning device of claim 27. Porat further discloses wherein the water sensor and the power source are disposed within the first interior sub-volume (the battery pack is located in a separate housing (with the power shut off switch 64) for ease of maintenance (compartment 60). fig. 2) and the other circuits are disposed within the second interior sub-volume (the other circuits are on the other side in 111, fig. 16). However, they are silent about the water sensor has the probes to detect the water.
Stieb discloses the water sensor (20 , fig. 2) has pair of probes (26, 27, fig. 2).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s water sensor in view of Hermann to include the probe kind of water sensor as taught by Stieb, in order to detect the presence of water more precisely.
Regarding claim 32, Porat in view of Hermann discloses the method of claim 30. However, they are silent about wherein detecting the water intrusion within the compartment comprises using a sensing circuit that includes a pair of probes to detect the presence of water within the compartment.
Stieb discloses wherein detecting the water intrusion within the compartment comprises using a sensing circuit that includes a pair of probes to detect the presence of water within the compartment (See the annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
892
975
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s water sensor in view of Hermann to include the probe kind of water sensor as taught by Stieb, in order to detect the presence of water more precisely.
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porat (US 2004/0173542), and Hermann (US 2012/0105015), and further in view of Stieb (US 2011/0162727).
Regarding claim 14, Porat in view of Stieb and Hermann discloses the circuit board of claim 13. Stieb discloses a pair of probe to detect the presence of water (a positive wire terminal 26, a negative wire terminal 27, fig. 2, paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s water sensor to include the probe kind of water sensor as taught by Stieb, in order to detect the presence of water more precisely.
However, they both are silent about the circuit board further comprising a second pair of probes to detect the presence of the liquid, but having one more pair of probe on the other side of the board is merely a duplication of the part (see in MPEP ** In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)).
**In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s in view of Stieb and Hermann to have one more pair of probe on the other side of the circuit board, in order to detect the water on the other side of the board to protect the battery from the water immediately and precisely.
Regarding claim 15, Porat in view of Stieb and Hermann discloses the circuit board of claim 14. Stieb further discloses wherein the first pair of probes is disposed at a first end of the circuit board and configurable to detect the presence of the liquid at the first end of the circuit board (The electrically conducting water will then allow current to flow from the positive wire terminal 26 to the negative wire terminal 27. By allowing the current to flow from the positive wire terminal 26 to the negative wire terminal 27, the detection circuit 70 is completed. Once the electronic control unit 1 detects that the sensor 20 has completed the detection circuit 70, power to the humidifier 2 will be cut and power to the auxiliary solenoid valve 5 will be turned on, paragraph [0012]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s water sensor to include the probe kind of water sensor as taught by Stieb and Hermann, in order to detect the presence of water more precisely.
However, they both do not explicitly disclose the second pair of probes is disposed at a second end of the circuit board and configurable to detect the presence of the liquid at the second end of the circuit board, but having the second pair of probes is disposed at a second end of the circuit board to detect the presence of the liquid at the second end of the circuit board is merely a duplication of the part (**see in MPEP ** In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960)).
** In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) (Claims at issue were directed to a water-tight masonry structure wherein a water seal of flexible material fills the joints which form between adjacent pours of concrete. The claimed water seal has a "web" which lies in the joint, and a plurality of "ribs" projecting outwardly from each side of the web into one of the adjacent concrete slabs. The prior art disclosed a flexible water stop for preventing passage of water between masses of concrete in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s in view of Stieb and Hermann to have one more pair of probe on the other side of the circuit board, in order to detect the water on the other side of the board to protect the battery from the water immediately and precisely.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Porat (US 2004/0173542), Hermann (US 2012/0105015), and Stieb (US 2011/0162727) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Durvasula (US 2018/0148947).
Regarding claim 17, Porat in view of Stieb and Hermann discloses the method of claim 13. However, they are silent over a time delay circuit electrically connected between the sensing circuit and the crowbar circuit.
Durvasula discloses a time delay circuit (322, fig. 6) electrically connected between the sensing circuit (308, fig. 6) and the crowbar circuit (the protection circuit having the transistors TP1 and TP2 to interrupt the power supply to moto, fig. 6).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of claimed invention to modify Porat’s in view of Stieb and Herman to include a time delay circuit as taught by Durvasula, in order to prevent the circuit from being activated too quickly.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SADIA KOUSAR whose telephone number is (571)272-3386. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Julian Huffman can be reached at (571) 272-2147. 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.
SADIA . KOUSAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2859
/JULIAN D HUFFMAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859