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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claims 22, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 32, 34, 38 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gareis [US 4,450,427].
Claim 22, Gareis discloses [figure 5] a state detection circuit comprising: a Hall sensor circuit with a Hall sensor [58]; a voltage regulator [V1]; and an output switch [10], wherein the Hall sensor circuit is connected between the voltage regulator and the output switch [figures 5 and 6].
Claim 23, Gareis discloses the state detection circuit according to claim 22, wherein the Hall sensor [58] is configured to provide a binary output signal [col. 5 line 65 to col. 6 line 5, the hall sensor output is either grounded or open].
Claim 25, Gareis discloses the state detection circuit according to claim 22, further comprising a supply port [66] and a ground terminal [ground; figures 5 and 6].
Claim 26, Gareis discloses the state detection circuit according to claim 25, further comprising a first diode [86] between the supply port [66] and an input of the voltage regulator [V1].
Claim 29, Gareis discloses the state detection circuit according to claim 22, wherein the Hall sensor is connected to three different lines [V1, 68 and ground; figure 5] of the Hall sensor circuit.
Claim 30, Gareis discloses the state detection circuit according to claim 29, wherein the Hall sensor [58] is connected to ground and the output switch [10], and wherein the Hall sensor is electrically coupled to an output of the voltage regulator [figure 5].
Claim 32, Gareis discloses the state detection circuit according to claim 22, further comprising a first diode [86] circuit between an output terminal [62] and ground.
Claim 34, Gareis discloses the state detection circuit according to claim 22, further comprising a third resistive [resistor in 60] element between ground and the output switch [10; figure 5].
Claim 38, Gareis discloses a remotely operable switch comprising: an electrical switch [36/38]; and the state detection circuit according to claim 22 configured to provide a switching state of the electrical switch.
Claim 39, Gareis discloses the remotely operable switch according to claim 38, wherein the remotely operated switch is a relay, a contactor [abs] or a high voltage contactor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24, 27, 28, 31, 33, 35-37 and 40-42 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends that the claims are directed toward a detection circuit, specifically that Gareis is not a state detection circuit.
In response, Gareis specifically discloses that Hall device 58 placed in a path to monitor the magnitude of flux generated by the coil 10 enables the electrical energy supply to the coil 10 to be regulated in such a manner as to maintain a constant armature flux. [col. 4 lines 42-64]. Therefore, Gareis detects the magnetic flux (state) of the coil. The claim language merely requires a state detection circuit and does not exclude additionally controlling the coil.
Applicant’s arguments rely on language solely recited in preamble recitations in claim(s) 20-42. When reading the preamble in the context of the entire claim, the recitation of a state detection circuit is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bernard Rojas whose telephone number is (571)272-1998. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. thru Fri. 7:00 am - 4:00 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, Shawki S Ismail can be reached at (571) 272-3985. 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.
/BERNARD ROJAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights