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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 21, 2026 has been entered.
2. Claims 20-27 are canceled.
3. Claims 1-19 and 28 are pending and presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-19 and 28 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground rejection necessitate by applicant amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112 (a):
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
6. Claims 1-19 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 112, first paragraph, as falling to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification fails to mention or teach adjust reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof as claimed in independent claims 1, 14, and 28. The specification recites “utilizing the operational label of a given switched-capacitor bank, as generated by the systems and methods herein, an operating utility may adjust the setting if the capacity is adequate or add more capacitor banks if inadequate (paragraph 0026).” The applicant should explicitly explain how the specification support the claim limitation such as adjust reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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 of this title, 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.
8. Claims 1-9, 13-16, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al. US 2013/0054162 (hereinafter, Smith), in view of McHann, JR et al. US 2014/0215064 (hereinafter, McHann), in further view of Bastos et al. “Analysis of Power Factor Over Correction in a Distribution Feeder”, 2016 (hereinafter, Bastos).
9. Regarding claim 1, Smith discloses a system for automated detection of switched-capacitor bank operation on a power grid comprising:
a power line sensor positioned on a power line to measure electric field strength and current ([0062], [0095], Fig. 2);
a processor in communication with the power line sensor; memory storing a capacitor bank analyzer as computer readable instructions that, when executed by the processor ([0062], [0068], Figs. 2, 10), control the processor to:
receive electric field data and current data from the power line sensor ([0062], [0095], Fig. 2),
extract one or more key characteristics from the electric field data and the current data ([0062], Fig. 2: regardless of the specific mechanism used to electrically couple sensor unit 110 to line segment 116, sensor unit 110 may include circuitry 212 for extracting electrical properties of the line segment. To this end, circuitry 212 may include one or more sensors configured to extract electrical properties. For example, circuitry 212 may include electric field sensor 212a, voltage sensor 212b, and current direction sensor 212c…to determine electrical properties, such as voltage or current on line 116. In this way, circuitry 212, in combination with power line interface 210, may act as a sensor for electrical properties…[Further], [0095]-[0098]: multiple sensor units may be used to detect a condition in a power distribution system, including a condition associated with a capacitor bank... Accordingly, multiple sensor units (e.g., three sensor units for a three-phase capacitor bank) may be installed in the power distribution system near the capacitor bank. Each of these sensor units may be configured to measure power factor information. As is known, power factor is indicative of the relative amounts of real and reactive power for the corresponding conductor and may be determined using techniques as are known in the art, including by determining relative timing of peaks in the current and voltage on the line. The sensors may be positioned such that the measured power factors vary based on the amount of reactive power that is being corrected by the capacitor bank…the power factor measured by a sensor unit may vary over time due to changes in load and controlled switching in the capacitor bank. As a result, …changes in power factor may occur without a sudden change indicating a fault condition associated with a capacitor bank. Thus, the fault condition may be determined by detecting a change relative to a normal pattern of power factor variations), wherein power factor is interpreted as equivalent to the limitation one or more key characteristics within the claim,
compare the one or more key characteristics to a library of key characteristics of a predictive model to recognized capacitor switching events from the electric field data and the current data ([0098]-[0102], [0105], Figs. 2, 11A-B),
output based at least in part on the predicted model, a label indicating a presence of, or a lack of, a capacitor event ([0087]-[0088], [0091]-[0102], [0112], [0114], Figs. 3 and 11A-B);
determining whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor event ([0093], [0095]).
Smith does not disclose:
a model trained to recognized capacitor switching events, output a capacitor switching event, determining whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof, and adjust reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof.
However, McHann discloses:
a model trained to recognized capacitor switching events ([0009], [0039]-[0041]), and output a capacitor switching event ([0031], [0042]);
determining whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof ([0031], [0039]-[0040]: a capacitor bank ("CB") 112 and a switch 114 can each include communications apparatus that transmit status information to the SPU 104. The status information transmitted by the capacitor bank 112 can include, for example, data specifying whether the capacitor bank 112 is coupled to the network. For example, the SPU 104 may transmit activation instructions (instructions that cause the capacitor to be electrically coupled into the network 101) to the capacitor bank 112. In response to receiving the activation instructions, the capacitor bank 112 can execute instructions that cause the capacitor bank 112 to be activated, such that the capacitor bank is electrically coupled into the network 101. In turn, the capacitor bank 112 can transmit confirmation data indicating that the capacitor bank has been activated. Similar data transmissions can occur when the capacitor bank is to be deactivated).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith to use a model trained to recognized capacitor switching events, output a capacitor switching event and determining whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof as taught by McHann. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to identify and output capacitor switching events efficiently (McHann, [0040]-[0042]).
Smith discloses how a power distribution network is controlled. For example
Information indicating when one or more capacitor banks are switched may be used to construct a model for predicting power factor measurements (see, [0102]). Further, Smith discloses a capacitor bank may be used, by some power distribution systems, to compensate for a low power factor where loads on the power distribution system tend to be reactive, such as may result when the loads connected to the power distribution system contain large motors, inductive heaters or other devices that may draw reactive power. The capacitor bank, when connected to the same line near the reactive load can supply reactive power (see, [0091]-[0092]). Furthermore, McHann discloses grid event detection and provides information and/or instructions that can be used to address the grid event (e.g., end the grid event, adjust network element configurations, or otherwise take action in response to detecting the grid event (see, [0035]).
Smith in view of McHann does not disclose:
adjust reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof.
However, Bastos discloses:
adjust reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof (Abstract, pages 1, 2, 5 (col. 2) ,and Table 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith in view of McHann to use adjust reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof as taught by Bastos. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to optimize the power grid system (Bastos, Abstract, page 1).
10. Regarding claim 28, the claim is rejected with the same rationale as in claim 1.
11. Regarding claim 2, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 1, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the label indicating the switched capacitor bank engaging with the power grid ([0092], [0098], [0102], [0147]). See also McHann ([0039]-[0041]).
12. Regarding claim 3, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 1, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the label indicating the switched capacitor bank dis-engaging with the power grid ([0092]-[0093], [0096] [0100], [0147]). See also McHann ([0039]-[0041]).
13. Regarding claim 4, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 1, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the power line sensor including location-gathering circuitry ([0067], Fig. 2). See also McHann ([0042]).
14. Regarding claim 5, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 4, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses additional computer readable instructions that, when executed by the processor, control the processor to associate location information and time stamps to the received electric field data and the received current data ([0066]-[0067], Fig. 2). See also McHann ([0042]).
15. Regarding claim 6, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 1, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the power line sensor including three pairs of electric field sensors and current sensors, each pair located on one of three phases of the power line ([0074]-[0075], [0093], [0095]).
16. Regarding claim 7, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 6, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the instructions to compare the one or more key characteristics to a library of key characteristics including that, when executed by the processor, control the processor to compare, for each of the three phases, the electric field and current data from the respective pair of electric field sensors and current sensors, and the instructions to output the label including instructions that, when executed by the processor, control the processor to output a first phase label, a second phase label, and a third phase label, each of the first phase label, the second phase label, and the third phase label indicating the presence of, or the lack of, a respective capacitor event on a respective one of the three phases ([0090], [0093]-[0101], Figs. 11A-11B).
Smith does not disclose:
output a capacitor switching event.
However, McHann discloses:
output a capacitor switching event ([0031], [0042]). See also Bastos (page 4, Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith to use output a capacitor switching event as taught by McHann. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to output operation of the capacitor bank (McHann, [0040]-[0042]).
17. Regarding claim 8, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 1, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the one or more key characteristics including one or more of: electric field (e-field) rise, e-field drop, current rise, current drop, power factor correction, real-power variation, reactive power reduction, reactive power increase, inrush current, e-field oscillation, current oscillation, e-field drop, current rise, e-field root mean squared (RMS), E-field standard deviation (STD), Current RMS, Current STD, e-field apparent power, e-field real power, e-field reactive power, E-I phase, or peak counts per cycle ([0095]: reactive power reduction, or reactive power increase).
18. Regarding claim 9, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 1, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the processor being located at the power line sensor ( Fig. 2: control (data processing)). Further, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos discloses a memory (see, Smith [0191]-[0192], McHann (Fig. 5), Bastos ([0015]). Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos does not disclose the memory being located at the power line sensor. However, the memory being located at the power line would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos.
19. Regarding claim 13, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 1, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the capacitor bank analyzer including further instructions that, when executed by the processor, control the processor to: log in the memory, the one or more key characteristics of the received e-field data and the current data ([0062], [0068], Figs. 2 and 10); and,
compare at least one current key characteristic to one or more prior key characteristics; and output a capacitor bank degradation signal when the at least one current key characteristic differs from the one or more prior key characteristics by a predetermined threshold ([0089], [0093]-[0101], claim 18, and Fig. 11B). See also McHann ([0039]-[0040]).
20. Regarding claim 14, Smith discloses method for verifying an operation of a capacitor bank on a power line comprising:
sensing, using a power line sensor, current and electric field on a power line ([0062], [0095], Fig. 2);
recording a transient waveform based on the sensed current and electric field ([0062], [0095], [0101], Figs. 6A-6C, 10);
determining key characteristics ([0062], Fig. 2: regardless of the specific mechanism used to electrically couple sensor unit 110 to line segment 116, sensor unit 110 may include circuitry 212 for extracting electrical properties of the line segment. To this end, circuitry 212 may include one or more sensors configured to extract electrical properties. For example, circuitry 212 may include electric field sensor 212a, voltage sensor 212b, and current direction sensor 212c…to determine electrical properties, such as voltage or current on line 116. In this way, circuitry 212, in combination with power line interface 210, may act as a sensor for electrical properties…[Further], [0095]-[0098]: multiple sensor units may be used to detect a condition in a power distribution system, including a condition associated with a capacitor bank... Accordingly, multiple sensor units (e.g., three sensor units for a three-phase capacitor bank) may be installed in the power distribution system near the capacitor bank. Each of these sensor units may be configured to measure power factor information. As is known, power factor is indicative of the relative amounts of real and reactive power for the corresponding conductor and may be determined using techniques as are known in the art, including by determining relative timing of peaks in the current and voltage on the line. The sensors may be positioned such that the measured power factors vary based on the amount of reactive power that is being corrected by the capacitor bank…the power factor measured by a sensor unit may vary over time due to changes in load and controlled switching in the capacitor bank. As a result, …changes in power factor may occur without a sudden change indicating a fault condition associated with a capacitor bank. Thus, the fault condition may be determined by detecting a change relative to a normal pattern of power factor variations), wherein power factor is interpreted as equivalent to the limitation key characteristics within the claim,
comparing the key characteristics with a library of recorded characteristics generated by a model to recognize capacitor switching event to generate a label of the event ([0098]-[0102], [0105], Figs. 11A-B), and outputting the label ([0087]-[0088], [0091]-[0102], [0112], [0114], Figs. 3 and 11A-B);
determining whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor event ([0093], [0095]).
Smith does not disclose:
determining key characteristics of the transient waveform; a machine learning model trained to recognized capacitor switching events to generate a label of a transient event within the transient waveform, determining whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof, and adjusting reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof.
However, McHann discloses:
determining key characteristics of the transient waveform; a machine learning model trained to recognized capacitor switching events to generate a label of a transient event within the transient waveform ([0031], [0039]-[0041], [0046]-[0049], Figs. 2A, 2B);
determining whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof ([0031], [0039]-[0040]: a capacitor bank ("CB") 112 and a switch 114 can each include communications apparatus that transmit status information to the SPU 104. The status information transmitted by the capacitor bank 112 can include, for example, data specifying whether the capacitor bank 112 is coupled to the network. For example, the SPU 104 may transmit activation instructions (instructions that cause the capacitor to be electrically coupled into the network 101) to the capacitor bank 112. In response to receiving the activation instructions, the capacitor bank 112 can execute instructions that cause the capacitor bank 112 to be activated, such that the capacitor bank is electrically coupled into the network 101. In turn, the capacitor bank 112 can transmit confirmation data indicating that the capacitor bank has been activated. Similar data transmissions can occur when the capacitor bank is to be deactivated).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith to use determining key characteristics of the transient waveform; a machine learning model trained to recognized capacitor switching events to generate a label of a transient event within the transient waveform and determining whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof as taught by McHann. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to identify and output capacitor switching events efficiently (McHann, [0040]-[0042]).
Smith discloses how a power distribution network is controlled. For example
Information indicating when one or more capacitor banks are switched may be used to construct a model for predicting power factor measurements (see, [0102]). Further, Smith discloses a capacitor bank may be used, by some power distribution systems, to compensate for a low power factor where loads on the power distribution system tend to be reactive, such as may result when the loads connected to the power distribution system contain large motors, inductive heaters or other devices that may draw reactive power. The capacitor bank, when connected to the same line near the reactive load can supply reactive power (see, [0091]-[0092]). Furthermore, McHann discloses grid event detection and provides information and/or instructions that can be used to address the grid event (e.g., end the grid event, adjust network element configurations, or otherwise take action in response to detecting the grid event (see, [0035]).
Smith in view of McHann does not disclose:
adjusting reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof.
However, Bastos discloses:
adjusting reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof (Abstract, pages 1, 2, 5 (col. 2) ,and Table 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith in view of McHann to use adjusting reactive power energizing of the switched capacitor bank on the power grid based at least in part on whether the label correlates to an actual capacitor switching event or lack thereof as taught by Bastos. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to optimize the power grid system (Bastos, Abstract, page 1).
21. Regarding claim 15, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the method of claim 14, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses attaching location and time information, captured by a positioning interface at the power line sensor, to the electric field and current data ([0066]-[0067], [0136], Fig. 2).
22. Regarding claim 16, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the method of claim 15, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses preprocessing the transient waveform into a pre-disturbance section, a disturbance section, and a post-disturbance section; wherein the determining key characteristics of the waveform including determining key characteristics for each of the pre-disturbance section, the disturbance section, and the post-disturbance section; and wherein the comparing the key characteristics includes comparing the key characteristics for each of the pre-disturbance section, the disturbance section, and the post-disturbance section against the library of recorded characteristics ([0090], [0093]-[0101], Figs. 6A-6C, 11A-11B). See also McHann ([0046]-[0049], and Figs. 2A, 2B).
23. Claims 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith, in view of McHann, in view of Bastos, in further view of Deaver et al. US 20120022713 (hereinafter, Deaver).
24. Regarding claim 10, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 1, as disclosed above.
Smith in view of McHann discloses indication of a control signal to energize or deenergize the capacitor bank as disclosed above (see claims 2 and 3).
Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos does not disclose:
the capacitor bank analyzer initiating in response to receipt, from a SCADA associated with the power grid, of indication of a control signal to energize or deenergize the capacitor bank.
However, Deaver discloses:
the capacitor bank analyzer initiating in response to receipt, from a SCADA associated with the power grid, of indication of a control signal to energize or deenergize the capacitor bank ([0027], [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos to use the capacitor bank analyzer initiating in response to receipt, from a SCADA associated with the power grid, of indication of a control signal to energize or deenergize the capacitor bank as taught by Deaver. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to make changes to the power distribution system efficiently (Deaver, [0006]).
25. Regarding claim 19, the claim is rejected with the same rationale as in claim 10.
26. Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith, in view of McHann, in view of Bastos, in further view of Li et al. CN 105790366A (hereinafter, Li).
27. Regarding claim 11, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the system of claim 1, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the capacitor bank analyzer including further instructions that, when executed by the processor, control the processor to: log in the memory, based on the label and historical labels generated by the capacitor bank analyzer ([0068], [0091]-[0093], [0101], [0110]). Further, McHann discloses switching event and output an improper operation signal ([0031], [0040]-[0041]: list of grid events can include, for example, capacitor bank activation, a capacitor bank deactivation, a capacitor bank failure). See also Bastos (Abstract, pages 1-3).
Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos does not disclose:
switching event count; and output an improper operation signal when the switching event count breaches a predefined threshold.
However, Li discloses:
switching event count (page 7: on-off times reflection Capacitor banks, can determine whether the dispersion of concrete group by statistic switch number of times); and output an improper operation signal when breaches a predefined threshold (pages 6-7: when bank of super capacitors voltage is be more than or equal to minimum threshold values and less than or equal to maximum threshold values, it is believed that this group is normal, seals in this system and charge). Smith discloses detect the presence of any problems with the capacitor bank ([0091]-[0093], [0110]). McHann discloses capacitor switching event; and output an improper operation signal ([0031], [0040]-[0041]). Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos in view of Li does not disclose output an improper operation signal when the switching event count breaches a predefined threshold. However, outputting an improper operation signal when the switching event count breaches a predefined threshold would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos in view of Li as explained above.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos to use switching event count; and output an improper operation signal when the switching event count breaches a predefined threshold as taught by Li. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to determine operation of the capacitor bank based on number of switching event (Li, pages 6-7).
28. Regarding claim 12, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos in view of Li disclose the system of claim 11, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses analyzing operation of capacitor banks ([0091]-[0093], [0110]). Further, McHann discloses switching event and output an improper operation signal ([0031], [0040]-[0041]: list of grid events can include, for example, capacitor bank activation, a capacitor bank deactivation, a capacitor bank failure).
Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos does not disclose:
the threshold being a number or percentage of successful switching events of the capacitor bank over a predefined period.
However, Li discloses:
switching events of the capacitor bank over a predefined period (pages 6-7: on-off times reflection Capacitor banks, can determine whether the dispersion of concrete group by statistic switch number of times). Smith discloses detect the presence of any problems with the capacitor bank ([0091]-[0093], [0110]). McHann discloses capacitor switching event; and output an improper operation signal ([0031], [0040]-[0041]). Further, Li discloses operation of the capacitor bank when breaches a predefined threshold (pages 6-7: when bank of super capacitors voltage is be more than or equal to minimum threshold values and less than or equal to maximum threshold values, it is believed that this group is normal, seals in this system and charge). S Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos in view of Li does not disclose the threshold being a number or percentage of successful switching events of the capacitor bank over a predefined period. However, the threshold being a number or percentage of successful switching events of the capacitor bank over a predefined period would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos in view of Li as explained above.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos to use the threshold being a number or percentage of successful switching events of the capacitor bank over a predefined period as taught by Li. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to determine operation of the capacitor bank based on number of switching event (Li, pages 6-7).
29. Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith, in view of McHann, in view of Bastos, in further view of Liang et al. “Coded Switching Scheme for Monitoring the Operation of Distribution Capacitors” December 2018 (Cited in the IDS) (hereinafter, Liang).
30. Regarding claim 17, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos disclose the method of claim 14, preprocessing the transient waveform into a pre-disturbance section, a disturbance section, and a post-disturbance section, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses one or more transient waveforms, abnormal event in a power distribution system, and one or more of harmonic ([0062], [0094], Figs. 6A-6C). See also McHann ([0026], [0047], [0045], [0066]).
Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos does not disclose:
disqualifying one or more transient waveforms based on one or more of total harmonic distortion, standard deviation of the cycle-to-cycle root mean squared version of e-field in the pre-disturbance section and the post-disturbance section of the respective transient waveform, and standard deviation of the cycle-to-cycle root mean squared version of the current in the pre-disturbance section and the post-disturbance section of the respective transient waveform.
However, Liang discloses:
“energizing a capacitor can result in overvoltage, inrush current and harmonics. All these transient power quality problems may bring harmful impacts to the distribution system, especially to the user equipment. Therefore, it is necessary to monitor and identify the energizing capacitor before studying the effects of these transients” (Abstract, pages 3075, Figs. 2, 6-18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos to use disqualifying one or more transient waveforms based on one or more of total harmonic distortion, standard deviation of the cycle-to-cycle root mean squared version of e-field in the pre-disturbance section and the post-disturbance section of the respective transient waveform, and standard deviation of the cycle-to-cycle root mean squared version of the current in the pre-disturbance section and the post-disturbance section of the respective transient waveform as taught by Liang. The motivation for doing so would have been in order to identify transient waveform that may impacts the power distribution system (Liang, pages 3075).
31. Regarding claim 18, Smith in view of McHann in view of Bastos in view of Liang disclose the method of claim 17, as disclosed above.
Smith further discloses the key characteristics including one or more key characteristics including one or more of: electric field (e-field) rise, e-field drop, current rise, current drop, power factor correction, real-power variation, reactive power reduction, reactive power increase, inrush current, e-field oscillation, current oscillation, e-field drop, current rise, e-field root mean squared (RMS), E-field standard deviation (STD), Current RMS, Current STD, e-field apparent power, e-field real power, e-field reactive power, E-I phase, peak counts per cycle ([0095]: reactive power reduction, or reactive power increase).
Conclusion
32. Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers, and/or paragraphs, and/or pages in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
33. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EYOB HAGOS whose telephone number is (571)272-3508. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-5:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Shelby Turner can be reached on 571-272-6334. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Eyob Hagos/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857