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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/2/26 has been entered.
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) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forster et al. (US 2017/0338755) in view of Rodrian (US 2006/0076913).
Regarding claim 1,
Forster discloses (Fig. 1):
A method of operating a controller (Fig. 1, 80) and a motor (28) operably coupled to a power source (91, 92), wherein the power source (91, 92) is adapted to supply power to the motor (¶0048), the method comprising: measuring current flowing from the power source through the controller to the motor (Fig. 7, 94, ¶0084); and
protecting the controller and power source from overcurrent pulse events (222, ¶0100).
they do not disclose:
counting a number of current pulses in the current flowing from the power source through the controller to the motor; and causing the power source to stop supplying power to the motor when the number of current pulses meets or exceeds a pulse threshold
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 1):
counting a number of current pulses in the current flowing from the power source (Fig. 2, 6V) through the controller (200) to the motor (120, ¶0031, shown in Figs. 3A-3B); and causing the power source to stop supplying power to the motor when the number of current pulses meets or exceeds a pulse threshold (¶0050-¶0052),
Regarding claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 2,
Forster discloses the above elements from claim 1.
they do not disclose:
further comprising detecting the current pulses, wherein each of the current pulses is detected when the current meets or crosses a first current threshold and then meets or crosses a second current threshold.
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 7C):
further comprising detecting the current pulses, wherein each of the current pulses is detected when the current meets or crosses a first current threshold and then meets or crosses a second current threshold (¶0037).
Regarding claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 3,
Forster discloses the above elements from claim 1.
they do not disclose:
wherein counting the number of current pulses includes incrementing a pulse counter.
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 7C):
wherein counting the number of current pulses includes incrementing a pulse counter (Fig. 7C, 734).
Regarding claim 3, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 4,
Forster discloses the above elements from claim 1.
they do not disclose:
further comprising activating an indicator when the number of current pulses meets or exceeds the pulse threshold.
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 7C):
further comprising activating an indicator when the number of current pulses meets or exceeds the pulse threshold (stops motor, ¶0050-¶0052).
Regarding claim 4, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 5,
Forster discloses the above elements from claim 1.
they do not disclose:
further comprising deactivating the indicator after a predetermined amount of time.
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 7C):
further comprising deactivating the indicator after a predetermined amount of time (¶0053).
Regarding claim 5, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 6,
Forster discloses (Fig. 1):
further comprising: determining whether a trigger is actuated (trigger, ¶0086); and continuing to activate the indicator until the trigger is not actuated (can cut power, ¶0086).
Regarding claim 7,
Forster discloses (Fig. 10):
further comprising resetting the number of current pulses after causing the power source to stop supplying power to the motor (Fig. 10, starts at 110, then goes to 117, then 118, ¶0096-¶0097).
Regarding claim 8,
Forster discloses (Fig. 10):
further comprising: determining whether the current meets or exceeds a current threshold (fig. 10, 113); and initiating a current timer to measure a time value corresponding to an amount of time that the current meets or exceeds the current threshold (115, 116, ¶0095-¶0097).
Regarding claim 9,
Forster discloses (Fig. 1):
further comprising causing the power source to stop supplying power to the motor when the time value meets or exceeds a time threshold (¶0098).
Regarding claim 10,
Forster discloses (Fig. 1):
further comprising activating an indicator when the time value meets or exceeds the time threshold (¶0098).
Regarding claim 11,
Forster discloses (Fig. 1):
A tool (Fig. 1, 10) including a motor (Fig. 2, 28) and a power source (91, 92) adapted to supply power to the motor (28, ¶0048), comprising: a controller (Fig. 1, 80, , Fig 7, 94 measures current ¶0084) adapted to: measure current flowing from the power source through the controller to the motor (via 94, ¶0084); to protect the controller and power source from overcurrent pulse events (222, ¶0100).
they do not disclose:
count a number of current pulses; and cause the power source to stop supplying power to the motor when the number of current pulses meets or exceeds a pulse threshold
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 1):
count a number of current pulses (120, ¶0031, shown in Figs. 3A-3B); and cause the power source to stop supplying power to the motor when the number of current pulses meets or exceeds a pulse threshold (¶0050-¶0052)
Regarding claim 11, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 12,
Forster discloses the above elements from claim 11.
they do not disclose:
wherein the controller is further adapted to detect the current pulses, wherein each of the current pulses is detected when the current meets or crosses a first current threshold and then meets or crosses a second current threshold.
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 7C):
wherein the controller is further adapted to detect the current pulses, wherein each of the current pulses is detected when the current meets or crosses a first current threshold and then meets or crosses a second current threshold (¶0037).
Regarding claim 12, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 13,
Forster discloses the above elements from claim 11.
they do not disclose:
further comprising a pulse counter, wherein the controller is further adapted to count the number of current pulses by incrementing the pulse counter.
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 7C):
further comprising a pulse counter, wherein the controller is further adapted to count the number of current pulses by incrementing the pulse counter (Fig. 7C, 734).
Regarding claim 13, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 14,
Forster discloses the above elements from claim 11.
they do not disclose:
further comprising an indicator, wherein the controller is further adapted to activate the indicator when the number of current pulses meets or exceeds the pulse threshold.
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 7C):
further comprising an indicator, wherein the controller is further adapted to activate the indicator when the number of current pulses meets or exceeds the pulse threshold (stops motor, ¶0050-¶0052).
Regarding claim 14, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 15,
Forster discloses the above elements from claim 14.
they do not disclose:
wherein the controller is further adapted to deactivate the indicator after a predetermined amount of time.
However, Rodrian teaches (Fig. 7C):
wherein the controller is further adapted to deactivate the indicator after a predetermined amount of time (¶0053).
Regarding claim 15, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to take the tool controller from Forster which controls a motor, measures the current of the motor and turns off the power when a current limit is exceeded (¶0100) to prevent overheating, and utilize the pulse counter from Rodrian which stops a motor and lets it coast when a pulse number count exceeds a threshold to reduce costs and be easily configurable as taught by Rodrian (¶0057). This would also prevent the system from overheating due to too much current in the motor as taught by Forster (¶0102-¶0103).
Regarding claim 16,
Forster discloses (Fig. 1):
further comprising a trigger that, when actuated (trigger, ¶0086), causes the power source to supply the power to the motor, and wherein the controller is further adapted to: determine the trigger is actuated; and continue to activate the indicator until the trigger is not actuated (can cut power, ¶0086).
Regarding claim 17,
Forster discloses (Fig. 10):
wherein the controller is further adapted to reset the number of current pulses after causing the power source to stop supplying power to the motor (Fig. 10, starts at 110, then goes to 117, then 118, ¶0096-¶0097).
Regarding claim 18,
Forster discloses (Fig. 10):
wherein the controller is further adapted to: determine the current meets or exceeds a current threshold (fig. 10, 113; and initiate a current timer to measure a time value corresponding to an amount of time that the current meets or exceeds the current threshold (115, 116, ¶0095-¶0097).
Regarding claim 19,
Forster discloses (Fig. 1):
wherein the controller is further adapted to cause the power source to stop supplying power to the motor when the time value meets or exceeds a time threshold (¶0098).
Regarding claim 20,
Forster discloses (Fig. 1):
further comprising an indicator, wherein the controller is further adapted to activate the indicator when the time value meets or exceeds the time threshold (¶0098).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/2/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments pertaining to claims 1-20, applicant argues that Rodrian does not disclose counting the number of current pulses in the current flowing from the power source through the controller to the motor, and protecting the controller and power source from overcurrent pulse events by causing the power source to stop supplying power to the motor when the number of current pulses meets or exceeds a pulse threshold.
However, as shown in the rejection above, Rodrian teaches how in Fig. 7C, the number of pulses are counted, and even though applicant is arguing that Rodrian is not being used to count the pulses to prevent an overcurrent, that it does not teach the claimed language. However, Rodrian teaches counting the pulses in order to slow a motor to a stop once the amount of pulses has reached a counted value (¶0048). Applicant also argues that Forster does not teach these limitation either but Forster also teaches preventing an overcurrent pulse event by counting the number of times the current peaks in Fig. 6, ¶0085, and further in ¶0100 which would prevent a stall condition, which will cause an overcurrent event and damage the motor.
Applicant further argues that the combination of Forster and Rodrian is improper because they are seeking different ways to achieve different results, however, Rodrian is simply used to show counting current pulses explicitly, Forster teaches preventing excessive current from damaging a motor. Furthermore, Applicant argues that Forster does not teach protecting the controller from overcurrent however, in Fig. 2A, from Forester, the drive power supply is connected to the controller, excessive current would also damage the controller in addition to the motor when an excessive current flows through the device (¶0100). As such, examiner believes the combination to be proper as the Rodrian reference is used to teach counting pulses explicitly and Forster is used to teach a shutdown operation to prevent excessive current in (¶0100).
Applicant also argues that Forster and Rodrian do not teach “wherein each of the current pulses is detected when the current meets or crosses a first current threshold then meets or crosses a second current threshold” as recited in claims 2 and 12. However, in ¶0037 Rodrian teaches how there are multiple detection levels for current pulses
“ Block 412 is entered following an A/D interrupt (according to the interval initialized in block 404). A TIME variable (e.g., a rolling counter) is incremented in block 414. If the difference between the reference current, Im_REFERENCE, and the motor current, Im, is less than 2 counts (e.g., approximately 20 ma in the illustrated embodiment) in block 416, a pulse is detected. Of course, other detection thresholds or equations may be used depending on the particular characteristics of the system employed. After detecting a pulse in block 416, a PULSE_LEVEL variable is set to 1 in block 418. If a PREVIOUS_LEVEL variable equals 0 in block 420, indicating that this is the first detection for the current pulse, a MOTOR_PULSES variable is incremented in block 422, and a TIME_OF_PULSE variable is set to the current TIME in block 424. The PREVIOUS PULSE variable is set to the PULSE_LEVEL in block 426, and the Im_REFERENCE value for the next iteration is calculated in block 428 using the low pass filter equation, Im_REFERENCE=(Im_REFERENCE*15+Im)/16. Of course, other equations, such as other averaging equations, may be used to generate the Im_REFERENCE value for the next iteration. The microcontroller 200 returns from the A/D interrupt in block 430.” From paragraph 0037 of Rodrian.
As such, examiner is maintaining the rejections of claims 1-20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yabuguchi (US 10,461,674) – method of detecting overload of an electric machine
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES S LAUGHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7244. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached at (571) 272-2060. 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.
/C.S.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2846 /KAWING CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846