Detailed Action
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on November 17, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5 and 17-20 has/have been considered but are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by the amendments.
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, 5 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cruz (US-9,627,861) in view of Ree (US-2012/0242499).
In regards to claim 1, Cruz teaches an electric power meter [fig. 8A element 64, col. 15 L. 16-18]. Cruz teaches that the electric power meter comprises a meter connectable to a socket of a meter extension that is connectable to a socket of an electrical panel, and that this arrangement permits to upgrade the system without upgrading the electrical panel [Fig. 8A element 11 (meter extension), 61 (electrical panel) and 64 (meter), fig. 8b, fig. 8C, abstract L. 1-3, col. 15 L. 16-18]. This teaching means that the meter and meter extension are modules removably coupled to each other and the electrical panel. In other words, the electric power meter comprises a plurality of physically separated swappable modules removably coupled to each other. Furthermore, Cruz teaches that the plurality of modules comprises an independently meter (measuring module) and a meter extension (at least one module different from the measuring module) [fig. 8A element 11 (at least one module different from the measuring module) and 64 (measuring module), col. 15 L. 16-18]. Also, Cruz teaches that the electric power meter comprises a meter connectable to a socket of a meter extension that is connectable to a socket of an electrical panel, and that this arrangement permits to upgrade the system without upgrading the electrical panel [Fig. 8A element 11 (meter extension), 61 (electrical panel) and 64 (meter), fig. 8b, fig. 8C, abstract L. 1-3, col. 15 L. 16-18]. This teaching means if desired, the meter extension and the meter can be independently replaced. In other words, said plurality of modules being configured to enable the modules different from the measuring module to be replaced independently of the measuring module and to enable the measuring module to be replaced independently of the modules different from the measuring module. Cruz further teaches that the meter extension comprises a breaker [fig. 9B element 3, fig. 11B element 3a, fig. 11C element 3b, col. 16 L. 40-43, col. 17 L. 32-35 and L. 41-44]. This teaching means that said at least one module different from the sealed measuring module comprises a breaker module.
Cruz does not teach that the measuring module is sealed, and that the measuring module does not need resealing, recommissioning, recertification, or reverification when one of the modules different from the sealed measuring module is replaced.
On the other hand, Ree teaches that the measuring module is sealed [fig. 4 elements 110 (measuring module), par. 0015 L. 12-17 (sealed measuring module), par. 0016 L. 23-26 (no resealing required when modules are separated)]. Also, Ree teaches since the measuring module is an independent module, no resealing, recommissioning, recertification, or reverification of the sealed measuring module is required [par. 0016 L. 23-26].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Ree’s teachings in the meter taught by Cruz because a sealed measuring module permit to protect the components of the meter without resealing, recommissioning, recertification, or reverification of the sealed measuring module.
The combination of Cruz and Ree teaches that the meter extension is an independent module separate from the measuring module [see Cruz fig. 8A], and that the measuring module in independent sealed module that does not require resealing, recommissioning, recertification, or reverification [see Cruz fig. 8A element 64, see Ree fig. 4 element 110, par. 0016 L. 23-26]. These teachings means when one of the modules different from the sealed measuring module is replaced, no resealing, recommissioning, recertification, or reverification of the sealed measuring module is required.
In regards to claim 5, the combination of Cruz and Ree, as shown in the rejection of claim 1 above, teaches the claimed electric power meter performing the claimed functionality. Therefore, the combination also teaches the claimed method.
In regards to claim 17, the combination of Cruz and Ree, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the seal when tampered will require the meter to be recertified [see Ree par. 0015 L. 12-21 (sealed measuring module), par. 0016 L. 23-26 (no resealing required when modules are separated)]. This teaching means that the sealed measuring module is sealed according to applicable regulations.
In regards to claim 18, the combination of Cruz and Ree, as shown in the rejection of claim 17 above, teaches the claimed limitations.
In regards to claim 19, the combination of Cruz and Ree, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the sealed measuring module can be replaced, and the module different from the sealed measuring module be reused with the new measuring module [see Ree par. 0016 L. 23-26, par. 0027 L. 17-20]. This teaching means that when the sealed measuring module is replaced, no recommissioning, recertification, or reverification of the modules different from the sealed measuring module is required.
In regards to claim 20, the combination of Cruz and Ree, as shown in the rejection of claim 19 above, teaches the claimed limitations.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cruz (US-9,627,861) in view of Ree (US-2012/0242499) as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Iliev et al. (US-10,533,882) and Artiuch et al. (US-2018/0316987).
In regards to claim 2, the combination of Cruz and Ree, as applied in the rejection of claim 1 above, further teaches that the power meter further comprises a communications module, and the power meter is coupled to a network via the communications module, wherein the communications module independently facilitates communicative coupling between the power meter and the network [see Ree fig. 1 element 124, fig. 4 element 424, par. 0025 L. 18-26].
The combination teaches that the communication module is an independent module from the measuring module [see Ree fig. 4 element 424] and that the measuring module can be independently replaced from other modules in the system [see Cruz fig. 8A element 64, see Ree par. 0016 L. 23-26]. However, the combination does not teach that the communication module is at least one of the modules different from the sealed measuring module.
On the other hand, Iliev teaches that a communication module can be an independent module that can be replaced without the need of resealing, recommissioning, recertification, or reverification of the measuring module [fig. 1 element 106, col. 2 L. 58-59, col. 6 L. 33-44, col. 15 L. 27-29]. This teaching means that the at least one module different from the sealed measuring module comprises a communication module and that the communications module and the sealed measuring module are configured to be replaceable independently of each other.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Iliev’s teachings of making the communication module different to be independently replaceable in the meter taught by the combination because it will reduce the cost of upgrading of the system [see Iliev col. 6 L. 38-42].
The combination of Cruz, Ree and Iliev does not teach that the communication module receives a communication from the network in a first format; and the communications module converts the communication from the first format into a second format for use by the power meter.
On the other hand, Artiuch teaches a communication module for a utility meter which is able to translate communications from an end device and received at the meter from/to a meter format to/from a format used by a network [fig. 5 element 104 (end device), 110 (communications module), 114 (transmission from/to the network in first format) and S1 (second/meter format), par. 0020 L. 12-15, par. 0021 L. 1-16, par. 0022 L. 6-9]. This teaching means that the communication module receives a communication from an end device via the network in a first format that differs from a second format used by the power meter; and the communications module converts the communication from the first format into a second format for use by the power meter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Artiuch’s teachings of having a translator at the communication module in the meter taught by the combination because it will permit the communication module to be used with meters that use a different format than the one used by the network.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cruz (US-9,627,861) in view of Ree (US-2012/0242499), Iliev et al. (US-10,533,882) and Artiuch et al. (US-2018/0316987) as applied to claim(s) 2 above, and further in view of Ehrke et al. (US-6,538,577).
In regards to claim 3, the combination of Cruz, Ree, Iliev and Artiuch, as applied in claim 2 above, does not teach that the communications module transmits data to the network only when the communications module receives a request for the data.
On the other hand, Ehrke teaches that it is well known in the art that meters can be configured to send their data to the network only when an end device requests the data [col. 2 L. 1-12]. This teaching means that the communication device transmits data to the network only when the communications device receives a request for the data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use Ehrke’s teachings of transmitting data to the network only when data is requested in the meter taught by the combination because it will permit the network to control when data is transmitted from the meter thereby reducing the number of communication collisions and the amount of data lost during transmissions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANKLIN D BALSECA whose telephone number is (571)270-5966. The examiner can normally be reached 6AM-4PM EST M-F.
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, STEVEN LIM can be reached at 571-270-1210. 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.
/FRANKLIN D BALSECA/Examiner, Art Unit 2688