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. DETAILED ACTION The action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on 07/21/2023. Claims 1-18 are pending, where claims 1 and 10 are independent. This application claims the priority benefit of the provisional application no. 63/391,263 filed on 07/ 21 /2022 incorporated herein. Applicants did not submit any IDS. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p) because: per specification, paragraph [0036], reference character 103A missing in Fig.1. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification objections (Title) The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: Zonal Machine Learning-based Zonal Protection [[ For ]] Of Electric Power Distribution Systems. MPEP 606.01 Specification Objection The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: a) The full form of the terms (acronyms) “ DSS ” is/are not disclosed in the specification in para [0044]. Full form is required for at least one time (better in the beginning or first use). Appropriate correction is required. b) The reference character "130A" of Fig.1 is not disclosed in the specification. Appropriate explanation/correction is required. c) The same reference character 370 of Fig. 3 has been used for plurality of elements “Zone Classifier 370”, “machine learning classifier 370” and “SVM classifier 370” in the specification paragraph [0046]. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—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 or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: 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. Claim 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, because the best mode contemplated by the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s) has not been disclosed. Evidence of concealment of the best mode is based upon the lack of the illustration of the physical element “ LAMP ” to facilitate understanding of the invention. Because, the element “ LAMP ” of Fig.1 and specification, a module to perform the limitation “ provide fault protection when the primary fault protection system is inoperable” is unclear to enable the invention without drawing to a person of ordinary skilled in the art. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d): (d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.— Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), fourth paragraph: Subject to the [fifth paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA)], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers. Claim FILLIN "Pluralize \“Claim\” if necessary, insert \“is\” or \“are\” as appropriate, and insert the claim number(s) which are under rejection." \d *** \* MERGEFORMAT 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Because the limitation “ The system of claim 4 wherein ---” of the claim 4 in line 1 is improper . However, applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements. 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 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. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness . 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 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. Claims 1- 18 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaube , et al. USPGPub No. 20240039269 A1 ). As to claim s 1 and 10 , Gaube discloses A secondary fault protection system for use in an electric power distribution network having a primary fault protection system in communication with a relay connected to circuit breaker comprising: a plurality of local adaptive modular protection (LAMP) units configured to provide fault protection when the primary fault protection system is inoperable; ( Gaube [0001-48] “add further protection functions which specify the decision about the operating state of the energy supply grid - fault location specified by specifying a section on the faulty line - indicates that section on which the fault occurred - trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection” S ee Fig. 1-8 , evaluation device, protection logic - combination of microprocessor and software obviously provides LAMP units ) said LAMP units including a processor configured to identify a fault, the type of fault and fault zone; said LAMP units further including a digital output system that sends a signal to the circuit breaker when a LAMP unit detects a fault ( Gaube [0058-102] “protection device 10 has measured value acquisition device 11 and evaluation device 12 - communication interface 15 - a voltage, a current flow, a frequency, a power or a temperature - carries out further protection functions for detecting the fault type, the fault location, etc. and, if necessary, emits a trip signal on the output side - interrupt a harmful fault current - classifying a fault carried out - protection logic 13 - a combination of a microprocessor and software (firmware) executed by the microprocessor - neural network 14 - carry out an individual protection function, e.g. the detection of a fault type - distance protection device, a differential protection device or an overcurrent protection device” [0001-48] “trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection - outputting control commands to switching devices of the energy supply grid - classify operating states of the energy supply grid” See Fig. 1-8 , evaluation device, protection logic - combination of microprocessor and software, outputting control commands to switching devices, trip signal on the output side obviously provides processor configured to identify a fault, the type of fault and fault zone; a digital output system that sends a signal to the circuit breaker when a LAMP unit detects a fault ) . It would be therefore obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention that evaluation device, protection logic and combination of microprocessor and software are assumed as LAMP unit . As to claim s 2 and 11 , t he combination of Gaube and BBBB disclose all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above. The combination further d iscloses The system of claim 1 wherein each of said LAMP units operate in parallel with the primary protection system ( Gaube [0001-48] “add further protection functions which specify the decision about the operating state of the energy supply grid - fault location specified by specifying a section on the faulty line - indicates that section on which the fault occurred - trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection” SEE Fig. 1-8, control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection obviously provides operate in parallel with the primary protection system ) . As to claims 3 and 12, The system of claim 2 wherein each of said LAMP units provide primary protection for a predetermined zone associated with each of said LAMP units and each of said LAMP units provides backup protection for other LAMP units ( Gaube [0058-102] “protection device 10 has measured value acquisition device 11 and evaluation device 12 - communication interface 15 - a voltage, a current flow, a frequency, a power or a temperature - carries out further protection functions for detecting the fault type, the fault location, etc. and, if necessary, emits a trip signal on the output side - interrupt a harmful fault current - classifying a fault carried out - protection logic 13 - a combination of a microprocessor and software (firmware) executed by the microprocessor - neural network 14 - carry out an individual protection function, e.g. the detection of a fault type - distance protection device, a differential protection device or an overcurrent protection device - classification tree - combination of the topology and the current operating situation of the electrical energy supply grid - divided into the fault type, the fault location (equipment), the section and the respective trip options - potential tripping behavior of the protection devices - CB for circuit breaker - P and S indicate the installation locations of the primary and secondary protection - failure variants of the individual circuit breakers - neural network to train the secondary and tertiary backup protection behavior” [0001-48] “trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection - outputting control commands to switching devices of the energy supply grid - classify operating states of the energy supply grid” See Fig. 1-8, evaluation device, protection logic, combination of microprocessor and software, classification tree, combination of the topology, backup protection, primary and secondary protection, detecting fault type, fault location, etc. obviously provides primary protection for a predetermined zone associated with each of said LAMP units and each of said LAMP units provides backup protection for other LAMP units ) . As to claims 4 and 13, The system of claim 4 wherein a first and second zone is assigned to each LAMP unit, for said first protection zone 1 each of said LAMP units operates instantaneously and for said second protection zone each of said LAMP units operate with a predetermined delay ( Gaube [0058-102] “protection device 10 has measured value acquisition device 11 and evaluation device 12 - communication interface 15 - a voltage, a current flow, a frequency, a power or a temperature - carries out further protection functions for detecting the fault type, the fault location, etc. and, if necessary, emits a trip signal on the output side - interrupt a harmful fault current - classifying a fault carried out - protection logic 13 - a combination of a microprocessor and software (firmware) executed by the microprocessor - neural network 14 - carry out an individual protection function, e.g. the detection of a fault type - distance protection device, a differential protection device or an overcurrent protection device - classification tree - combination of the topology and the current operating situation of the electrical energy supply grid - divided into the fault type, the fault location (equipment), the section and the respective trip options - potential tripping behavior of the protection devices - CB for circuit breaker - P and S indicate the installation locations of the primary and secondary protection - failure variants of the individual circuit breakers - neural network to train the secondary and tertiary backup protection behavior” [0001-48] “trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection - outputting control commands to switching devices of the energy supply grid - classify operating states of the energy supply grid” See Fig. 1-8, evaluation device, protection logic, combination of microprocessor and software, classification tree, combination of the topology, backup protection, primary and secondary protection, fault type, fault location, section, respective trip options, detecting fault type, fault location, etc. obviously provides plurality of protection zone - operate with a predetermined delay ) . As to claims 5 and 14, The system of claim 4 wherein each of said LAMP units detect faults and identify the fault type based on prevailing circuit conditions ( Gaube [0058-102] “protection device 10 has measured value acquisition device 11 and evaluation device 12 - communication interface 15 - a voltage, a current flow, a frequency, a power or a temperature - carries out further protection functions for detecting the fault type, the fault location, etc. and, if necessary, emits a trip signal on the output side - interrupt a harmful fault current - classifying a fault carried out - protection logic 13 - a combination of a microprocessor and software (firmware) executed by the microprocessor - neural network 14 - carry out an individual protection function, e.g. the detection of a fault type - distance protection device, a differential protection device or an overcurrent protection device - classification tree - combination of the topology and the current operating situation of the electrical energy supply grid - divided into the fault type, the fault location (equipment), the section and the respective trip options - potential tripping behavior of the protection devices” [0001-48] “trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection - outputting control commands to switching devices of the energy supply grid - classify operating states of the energy supply grid” See Fig. 1-8, evaluation device, protection logic, combination of microprocessor and software, classification tree, combination of the topology, detecting fault type, fault location, etc. obviously provides detect faults and identify the fault type based on prevailing circuit conditions ) . As to claims 6 and 15, The system of claim 5 wherein each of said LAMP units includes three main classifiers, said classifiers including a circuit topology estimator, fault type classifier, and fault zone classifier ( Gaube [0058-102] “protection device 10 has measured value acquisition device 11 and evaluation device 12 - communication interface 15 - a voltage, a current flow, a frequency, a power or a temperature - carries out further protection functions for detecting the fault type, the fault location, etc. and, if necessary, emits a trip signal on the output side - interrupt a harmful fault current - classifying a fault carried out - protection logic 13 - a combination of a microprocessor and software (firmware) executed by the microprocessor - neural network 14 - carry out an individual protection function, e.g. the detection of a fault type - distance protection device, a differential protection device or an overcurrent protection device - classification tree - combination of the topology and the current operating situation of the electrical energy supply grid - divided into the fault type, the fault location (equipment), the section and the respective trip options - potential tripping behavior of the protection devices ” [0001-48] “trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection - outputting control commands to switching devices of the energy supply grid - classify operating states of the energy supply grid” See Fig. 1-8, evaluation device, protection logic, combination of microprocessor and software , classification tree, combination of the topology , detecting fault type, fault location, etc. obviously provides classifiers including a circuit topology estimator, fault type classifier, and fault zone classifier ) . As to claims 7 and 16, The system of claim 6 wherein each of said LAMP units includes an analog input system configured to collect three-phase voltage and current ( Gaube [0058-102] “protection device 10 has measured value acquisition device 11 and evaluation device 12 - communication interface 15 - a voltage, a current flow, a frequency, a power or a temperature - carries out further protection functions for detecting the fault type, the fault location, etc. and, if necessary, emits a trip signal on the output side - interrupt a harmful fault current - classifying a fault carried out - protection logic 13 - a combination of a microprocessor and software (firmware) executed by the microprocessor - neural network 14 - carry out an individual protection function, e.g. the detection of a fault type - distance protection device, a differential protection device or an overcurrent protection device” [0001-48] “trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection - outputting control commands to switching devices of the energy supply grid - classify operating states of the energy supply grid” See Fig. 1-8) . As to claims 8 and 17, The system of claim 7 wherein each of said LAMP units includes a phasor calculator that determines the root-mean-square (RMS) value and phase angle of the three-phase voltage and current measurements ( Gaube [0058-102] “protection device 10 has measured value acquisition device 11 and evaluation device 12 - communication interface 15 - a voltage, a current flow, a frequency, a power or a temperature - carries out further protection functions for detecting the fault type, the fault location, etc. and, if necessary, emits a trip signal on the output side - interrupt a harmful fault current - classifying a fault carried out - protection logic 13 - a combination of a microprocessor and software (firmware) executed by the microprocessor - neural network 14 - carry out an individual protection function, e.g. the detection of a fault type - distance protection device, a differential protection device or an overcurrent protection device” [0001-48] “trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection - outputting control commands to switching devices of the energy supply grid - classify operating states of the energy supply grid” See Fig. 1-8, measured value acquisition device of voltage, current, frequency, power obviously provides RMS value and phase angle ) . As to claims 9 and 18, The system of claim 8 wherein each of said LAMP units includes an active and reactive power calculator that receives input from a phasor calculator and sends prefault active and reactive power measured at the LAMP location to an SVM classifier which is used to determine the topology of the electric power distribution network ( Gaube [0058-102] “protection device 10 has measured value acquisition device 11 and evaluation device 12 - communication interface 15 - a voltage, a current flow, a frequency, a power or a temperature - carries out further protection functions for detecting the fault type, the fault location, etc. and, if necessary, emits a trip signal on the output side - interrupt a harmful fault current - classifying a fault carried out - protection logic 13 - a combination of a microprocessor and software (firmware) executed by the microprocessor - neural network 14 - carry out an individual protection function, e.g. the detection of a fault type - distance protection device, a differential protection device or an overcurrent protection device” [0001-48] “trip options which contain information about the functionality of any circuit breakers involved in a switch-off (e.g. “all switches intact”, “circuit breaker primary protection failed”, “circuit breaker secondary protection failed”) - train the neural network to control redundant protection concepts with secondary protection or tertiary protection - outputting control commands to switching devices of the energy supply grid - classify operating states of the energy supply grid” See Fig. 1-8, measured value acquisition device of voltage, current, frequency, power obviously provides limitation ) . Citation of Pertinent Prior Art It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2141.02 VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY , i.e., as a whole and 2123. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art made of record: Usman, et al. "Fault classification and location identification in a smart DN using ANN and AMI with real ‐ time data", Journal of Engineering, 2020; discloses a real-time fault classification and location identification method for a smart distribution network using artificial neural networks and advanced metering . Papallo , et al. USPGPub No. 20 04 / 0130838 A1 discloses a circuit protection system of dynamic zones protection based upon the circuit topology. Schweitzer , et al. USPGPub No. 201 9/0157854 A1 discloses a method to protect electric power delivery system upon occurrence of a fault condition by detecting the fault condition and signaling a protective action for overcurrent of protective equipment. Jecu , et al. USPGPub No. 20 14/0098450 A1 discloses a n electrical power distribution network includ e s feeder and plurality of consecutive protection relays configured to trip a breaker to interrupt the electrical power distribution . Wu, et al. USPGPub No. 2021/033441 A1 discloses a method determining control architecture of protective relays of power distribution system specifying topology of plurality of relays in the network of protective relays. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Md Azad whose telephone @ ( 571)272-0553 or email: md.azad@uspto.gov . The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thu 9AM-5PM . If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mohammad Ali can be reached on (571)272-4105 . 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 Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /Md Azad/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119 .