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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: measurement means in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lopez Gomez et al (US 2015/0214746 A1, cited on IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: A power cable (see Figs. 6, 8, 11 & 14, para. 0052) comprising: at least one conductive element (602), and further having: at least one means for measuring at least one physical quantity (a sensor for measuring variables/parameters, see para. 0057-0065); at least one electronic circuit (a load and/or a wireless telecommunication circuit, for example, see para. 0061), connected to said measurement means and suitable for receiving from said at least one measurement means at least one signal representative of said at least one physical quantity (see para. 0061); and at least one energy harvesting system (ferromagnetic core 802, coil 803, see para. 0241-0245) disposed inside said cable (inside jacket 609 of the cable, see Fig. 14 and para. 0147), suitable for supplying electrical energy to said at least one electronic circuit from the electrical energy available in said at least one conductive element (see para. 0058, 0072, 0104, 0110-0130).
Regarding claim 2, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, wherein said electronic circuit is disposed inside the cable (inside jacket 609, see Fig. 14 and para. 0147).
Regarding claim 3, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, wherein said energy harvesting system comprises a plurality of coils mounted in series and/or in parallel (see, for example, Fig. 11 which shows a plurality of coils 802 mounted in parallel around core 802), each coil of said plurality of coils having a magnetic core (802) and a predetermined number of turns (as shown in Fig. 11, each coil 803 includes a predetermined number of turns).
Regarding claim 4, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, comprising at least two conductive elements (for example, see Figs. 6 & 14, showing the cable has multiple conductive elements), wherein said energy harvesting system is disposed in at least one gap between said at least two conductive elements (for example, see Fig. 14, showing the energy harvesting system disposed in at least one gap between the conductive elements), at a minimal distance from said at least two conductive elements (see Fig. 14, showing the energy harvesting system at a minimal distance from the conductive elements), such that the flux density of the magnetic field generated by the electrical current circulating in said at least two conductive elements is maximal (the flux density is maximal as a result of the structure claimed, since Lopez Gomez et al teaches the claimed structure, the reference meets this limitation).
Regarding claim 5, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, wherein said at least one measurement means is disposed inside said cable (inside jacket 609, see Fig. 14 and para. 0147).
Regarding claim 6, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, wherein said at least one measurement means is disposed on said cable (the structure shown in Fig. 14 can be considered on the cable, see Fig. 14 and para. 0147).
Regarding claim 7, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, wherein said cable comprises three or four conductive elements (see Fig. 14, for example, showing three conductive elements).
Regarding claim 8, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, wherein said cable further comprises at least one radiofrequency device, suitable for transmitting to the outside of said cable data representative of said at least one signal representative of said at least one physical quantity (see para. 0047 and 0057-0065).
Regarding claim 9, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, wherein said cable further comprises an electrical energy storage means (for example, a battery, capacitor, supercapacitor, see para. 0069), suitable for storing the electrical energy harvested by said energy harvesting system (see para. 0068-0071).
Regarding claim 10, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, wherein said at least one measurement means comprises a current-carrying capacity sensor suitable for measuring the maximum intensity admissible by said cable (current, see para. 0063) and/or a temperature sensor suitable for measuring the temperature in a predetermined region of said cable (temperature, see para. 0063) and/or a pressure sensor suitable for measuring the pressure in a predetermined region of said cable (pressure, see para. 0065) and/or an intensity sensor suitable for measuring the intensity of the electrical current flowing through said cable (see para. 0063) and/or an electrical voltage sensor suitable for measuring the electrical voltage at the terminals of a portion of said at least one conductive element (voltage at a substation, see para. 0064) and/or an electrical power sensor suitable for measuring the electrical power available in said cable and/or a mechanical tension sensor suitable for measuring the mechanical tension undergone by said cable and/or a location sensor (GPS, for example, see para. 0047) suitable for determining the geographical location of a predetermined region of said cable and/or a vibration sensor suitable for measuring the vibrations in a predetermined region of said cable and/or a moisture sensor, suitable for determining the degree of moisture in a predetermined region of said cable and/or a gas flow rate sensor, suitable for determining the flow rate of a gas present in the environment of said cable and/or a gyroscopic sensor, suitable for determining the inclination of said cable (see examples of parameters/variables to be monitored in para. 0058-0065).
Regarding claim 11, Lopez Gomez et al teaches: The power cable as claimed in claim 1, wherein said cable further comprises at least one tube (jacket 609, see Fig. 14) inside which is housed said at least one electronic circuit and/or said at least one energy harvesting system and/or said at least one measurement means (the jacket 609 can be considered a tube that houses the energy harvesting system and load).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wen et al (CN 102437657 A).
Regarding claim 14, Wen et al teaches: An electrical energy harvesting system (see Figs. 1-3, the Abstract and para. 0007 of the attached translation) for harvesting electrical energy via a magnetic field induced by a circulation of current (current through transmission line 1), wherein said electrical energy harvesting system comprises a plurality of coils (coils 2-2 of transducer 2) mounted in series (see Fig. 3 and para. 0011), each coil of said plurality of coils having a magnetic core (core 2-1) and a predetermined number of turns (Figs. 1 & 2 show that each coil includes a predetermined number of turns 2-2, also see para. 0013).
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) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lopez Gomez et al (US 2015/0214746 A1, cited on IDS).
Regarding claim 12, the teachings of Lopez Gomez et al, as applied to claim 10, have been discussed above. Lopez Gomez et al also teaches that the tube is cylindrical (see Fig. 14).
Lopez Gomez et al does not specifically teach that the tube has an outer diameter less than or equal to 25 mm.
However, Lopez Gomez et al also teaches keeping the size of the outer diameter of the cable within acceptable ranges (see para. 0110). Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would recognize that the particular diameter of the tube or cable would vary according to the desired number of conductors, desired insulation levels, and the desired current carrying capacity for the intended application.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date, to include with the tube of Lopez Gomez et al, an outer diameter less than or equal to 25 mm, in order to keep the diameter of the cable within acceptable ranges while providing the desired functions for the intended application.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lopez Gomez et al (US 2015/0214746 A1, cited on IDS) in view of Wohlleb (US 2011/0274543 A1).
Regarding claim 13, the teachings of Lopez Gomez et al, as applied to claim 1, have been discussed above.
Lopez Gomez et al does not teach a wind turbine tower that comprises at least one cable as claimed in claim 1.
Wohlleb teaches a wind turbine tower with status monitoring (see Figs. 1& 2, the abstract and para. 0034 and 0042) and at least one cable (voltage line 5).
In view of Wohlleb’s teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date, to include with the tube of Lopez Gomez et al, a wind turbine tower that comprises at least one cable as claimed in claim 1, since Wohlleb teaches that a wind turbine is an environment where variables such as current, voltage, etc., need to be monitored.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the additional references cited on the attached PTO-892, which are directed to energy harvesting systems and/or monitoring of power lines.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jared Fureman whose telephone number is (571)272-2391. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/JARED FUREMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859