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 Objections
Claims 20 and 22 are objected to because:
Claim 20, line 2, “the casing” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 22, line 2, “said ceramic segment” lacks antecedent basis.
Claims 32 and 33 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claims, should refer to other claims in the alternative only and cannot depend on any other multiple dependent claims. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claims have not been further treated on the merits.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 13 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11456133. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claims are directed to a vacuum interrupter comprising an envelope (housing) and at least one control element (capacitive and resistive elements) disposed (form-lockingly) on the vacuum interrupter, with the differences between the claims being only minor variations in the recited scope that are not seen to involve an inventive step when the abilities of persons of ordinary skill are taken into full consideration.
Claims 13, 16, 18, 19, 25, 26 and 27-31 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 14, 16, 17, 20, 24, 25 and 27-30 of copending Application No. 18291394 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claims are directed to a vacuum interrupter comprising an least one envelope and at least one control element disposed on the vacuum interrupter, with the differences between the claims being only minor variations in the recited scope that are not seen to involve an inventive step when the abilities of persons of ordinary skill are taken into full consideration.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
Claims 13-19, 23-24 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Benkert et al, WO 2020025407 (with reference to the text of US 20210327666 for an English Translation) [Benkert].
Regarding claim 13, Benkert discloses (figs.3-5) a vacuum interrupter (2) for switching voltages, the vacuum interrupter (2) comprising:
at least one envelope (3), at least one fixed contact (9), and at least one movable contact (10); and at least one control element (12) disposed directly on the vacuum interrupter (2).
Regarding claim 14, Benkert further discloses where said at least one envelope (3) is a single envelope having at least one main screen (5) and at least two ceramic segments (4), where said at least one main screen (5) is arranged between said at least two ceramic segments (4) and said the at least one control element (12) is arranged directly on said envelope (3).
Regarding claim 15, Benkert further discloses where said at least one control element (12) is arranged directly on at least one of said ceramic segments (4) of said envelope (3).
Regarding claim 16, Benkert further discloses where at least one of the following is true:
said at least one control element (12 includes at least one capacitor and/or at least one resistor (18) [paras.0031-0032].
Regarding claim 17, Benkert further discloses where said at least one control element (12) is one of a plurality of control elements (12, 18) arranged in a circular arrangement on a circumference of the vacuum interrupter (2).
Regarding claim 18, Benkert further discloses where said control elements are at least two control elements (12, 18) [see fig.7].
Regarding claim 19, Benkert further discloses where said control elements are three or more control elements (12, 18) [see fig.8].
Regarding claim 23, Benkert further discloses where said at least one control element (12) is electrically and/or spatially arranged between said at least one fixed contact (9) and said at least one movable contact (10).
Regarding claim 24, Benkert further discloses where at least one of the following is true:
said at least one control element (12) is arranged between said at least one fixed contact (9) and a main screen (5).
Regarding claim 27, Benkert further configured to switch voltages in a high-voltage range greater (380 kV) than or equal to 52 kV [para.0002].
Regarding claim 28, Benkert further discloses an assembly, comprising at least two vacuum interrupters (32), electrically connected in series [see fig.2].
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Djogo, US 20200161065.
Regarding claim 31, Djogo discloses (figs.1A-1B and 2) a method, comprising:
providing vacuum interrupters (106) with control elements (110), the control elements (110) being capacitors (114, 116) arranged directly on the vacuum interrupters; and controlling an electrical voltage distribution among the vacuum interrupters (106) by way of the control elements (110).
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.
Claims 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benkert ‘666 in view of Uekama et al, JPS 59-125039 [Uekama].
Regarding claims 29 and 30, Benkert fails to disclose the assembly comprises a housing, being a metal tank housing and/or an insulator housing, and wherein said at least two vacuum interrupters are disposed in said housing, claim 29 and an insulating gas, being clean air (dry air), filled in said housing, claim 30.
Uekama discloses (figs. 1-3) an assembly comprising a housing (10), being a metal tank housing and/or an insulator housing, and where at least two vacuum interrupters (1) are disposed in said housing (10) and an insulating gas, being clean air (dry air), filled in said housing (10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Benkert, with the teaching of the assembly of Uekama, thereby distributing the high voltage equally among the vacuum interrupters connected in series and also provided insulation between the vacuum interrupter and passive electrical components.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-22 and 25-26 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 20, the prior art fails to teach or show, alone or in combination the claimed vacuum interrupter comprising at least one screening ring arranged directly on the casing of the vacuum interrupter and/or enclosing a circumference of the vacuum interrupter.
Regarding claim 25, the prior art fails to teach or show, alone or in combination the claimed vacuum interrupter where said at least one control element or a plurality of said control elements have a total capacitance in a range from 10 to 4000 pF.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Benkert et al, Schellekens et al, Martin, Yanabu et al and Ihara are examples of vacuum interrupters configured similar to the present invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM A BOLTON whose telephone number is (571)270-5887. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7:30AM - 5:00PM.
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, Renee S Luebke can be reached at (571)-272-2009.
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.
/WILLIAM A BOLTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2833