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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's Amendment and Response filed 03/04/2026 has been entered and made of record. This application contains 20 pending claims.
Claims 1, 5, 10, 15 and 18 have been amended.
Claims 2, 9 and 16 are cancelled.
Claims 21-23 are newly added.
This necessitated a new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action as stated below:
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to all claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 1, 3-7, 10-13, 15, 18-20 and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logvinov et al. (US 20040082203, hereinafter Logvinov), and further in view of Khan.
Regarding to claim 1, Logvinov discloses a method for monitoring an electrical system comprising a conductor having multiple electrical ground connection points (fig. 3, abstract shows the electrical power line system), the method performed by a monitoring apparatus in electrical connection with the conductor (fig. 3 shows power line with TDR), the method comprising:
receiving a reflected electrical signal from the conductor during the measurement time period (paragraph 0006 discloses a pulse of energy is transmitted down a cable. When that pulse reaches the end of the cable, or a fault along the cable, part or all of the pulse energy is reflected back to the instrument. TDR measures the time it takes for the signal to travel down the cable, see the problem, and reflect back; fig. 1-2 show the reflected signal), the reflected electrical signal (fig. 1-2) being produced by reflection of the injected electrical signal (paragraph 0006 discloses a pulse of energy is transmitted down a cable) at one or more points at which an impedance of the conductor changes (paragraph 0011 discloses a signature or characteristics of electrical energy reflected from a tap on a power line differs from the signature or characteristics of energy reflected by other variations in the power line impedance);
correlating the injected electrical signal and the reflected electrical signal to produce a measured waveform, the measured waveform indicative of a measured state of the electrical system during the measurement time period (fig. 4 and paragraph 0022 show and discloses a TDR/FDR Block 38, to transmit and receive TDR and FDR test signals onto the Powerline network during the moments of time when there are no normal PLC data communication events occurring. The device can be configured to either transmit, and receive a response from, a nearly instantaneous, or spike of energy (TDR), or transmit, and receive a response from, a predefined set of sine waves representing a test signal with preprogrammed energy levels over a range of carrier frequencies (FDR));
obtaining, from a storage device, a predetermined baseline waveform indicative of a baseline state of the electrical system during a calibration time period (paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections (implied from the storage) when the power line is correctly connected and operational and is without any unauthorized taps);
analysing the difference waveform to determine if there is a change of state in the electrical system between the calibration time period and the measurement time period (paragraph 0011 discloses signature or characteristics of electrical energy reflected from a tap on a power line differs from the signature or characteristics of energy reflected by other variations in the power line impedance, e.g. reflections from the open end of a line, a break in the line, a component in series with the line, etc. Therefore, the reflected energy can be analyzed and taps on the line, both authorized and unauthorized, can be identified and paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections),
wherein analysing the difference waveform comprises comparing the difference waveform with two or more stored difference waveforms, wherein each of the two or more stored difference waveforms corresponds to a known change of state of the electrical system (paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections when the power line is correctly connected and operational and is without any unauthorized taps. When the comparison indicates that there is an unauthorized tap, the location of the unauthorized tap is noted from the data and appropriate action is taken, such as physically finding the unauthorized tap, removing it and taking action with respect to the installer of the unauthorized tap).
Logvinov does not disclose
generating a difference waveform based on the measured waveform and the baseline waveform.
Khan discloses generating a difference waveform based on the measured waveform and the baseline waveform (fig. 4 step 420 and paragraph 052 discloses calculate different data between step 410 acquires SSTDR data and previously acquired baseline. Fig. 3s shows the graphical of the differences).
Khan further discloses:
correlating the injected electrical signal and the reflected electrical signal to produce a measured waveform, the measured waveform indicative of a measured state of the electrical system during the measurement time period (fig. 1-2 of Khan show the analysis 120 included an evaluation unit 128 to determine the state of the electrical system based on the signal 113B);
analysing the difference waveform to determine if there is a change of state in the electrical system between the calibration time period and the measurement time period (paragraph 0039 discloses 120 and 120 may further comprise an evaluation module 128 configured to determine a) whether a fault exists in the PV electrical system 140, and/or b) a location of the fault by use of the difference data 126).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to a POSITA to incorporate Khan into Logvinov in order to determine impedance mismatches of electrical systems that comprise large numbers of interconnections.
Regarding to claim 3, Logvinov in view of Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the change of state comprises a change of state of a ground connection of the electrical system (a broadest reasonable interpretation, paragraph 0011 of Logvinov discloses variations in the power line impedance and paragraph 0039 of Khan discloses to detect fault (change of state)).
Regarding to claim 4, Logvinov in view Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the change of state comprises a change to a conductive structure supporting a conductor of the electrical system (a broadest reasonable interpretation, Logvinov discloses unauthorized tap of electrical power).
Regarding to claim 5, Logvinov in view Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein injecting the electrical signal and receiving the reflected electrical signal is performed by one of time domain reflectometry (TDR) generator, Sequence Time Domain Reflectometry (STDR) generator, and Spread Spectrum Time Domain Reflectometry (SSTDR) generator (paragraph 00002 of Logvinov discloses TDR, FDR and abstract of Khan discloses SSTDR).
Regarding to claim 6, Logvinov in view Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein analysing the difference waveform comprises determining if there is a change of state based on an amplitude of the difference waveform (paragraph 0007 of Logvinov discloses examining the polarity, amplitude, frequencies and other electrical signatures of all reflections, and paragraphs 0039 and 0047 of Khan discloses the fault based on the amplitude of the reflected signal).
Regarding to claim 7, Logvinov in view Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein analysing the difference waveform comprises determining if there is a change of state based on a location of a peak of the difference waveform (paragraph 0046 and fig. 3A-B of Khan shows the fault location based on the peak of the signal).
Regarding to claim 10, Logvinov in Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the reflected electrical signal is received by a local monitoring system, and is transmitted to a server which is remote to the local monitoring system, and wherein the difference waveform is analysed by the server (paragraph 022 of Khan discloses he fault detection device 108 further comprises a communication interface 106 to communicatively couple the fault detector 110 to a network, such as a Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) network, a Local Area Network (LAN), a Wide Area Network (WAN), a Virtual Private Network (VPN), a Storage Area Network (SAN), a Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN), the Internet, and/or the like).
Regarding to claim 11, Logvinov in Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein analysing the difference waveform comprises determining one or both of a location within the electrical system (paragraphs 0006-7 of Logvinov and paragraph 0020 of Khan discloses determined the location of fault), and a type of any change of state based on the difference waveform (abstract).
Regarding to claim 12, Logvinov in Khan discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising generating an alarm when a change of state is determined, and generating an indication of the one or both of the location and type of change of state (paragraph 0013 of Logvinov discloses n alarm signal can be transmitted to the remote point over the power lines by the PLC equipment, and paragraph 0063 of Khan discloses displaying an alert on a display device, issuing a notification through an audio output, triggering an alarm system, transmitting one or more notification messages).
Regarding to claim 13, Logvinov in view Khan discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising obtaining a plurality of sets of reflectometry data of the electrical system, wherein each set of reflectometry data is obtained under a different simulated change of state of the system, and wherein each of the plurality of sets of reflectometry data comprise a simulated difference waveform corresponding to the respective simulated change of state of the system, and wherein each simulated difference waveform is stored as training data (paragraph 0052 of Khan discloses the baseline data comprises an average of a plurality of separate SSTDR autocorrelation data sets that account for different operating conditions of the PV electrical system (e.g., presence of sunlight, absence of sunlight, shade conditions, noise levels, and so on) which indicates that comparing more than two difference waveforms).
Regarding to claim 15, Logvinov discloses a monitoring apparatus for monitoring an electrical system (fig. 3, abstract shows and discloses method and apparatus for detecting an authorized tap the electrical power line system), comprising a conductor having multiple electrical ground connection points the monitoring apparatus comprising a reflectometry generator and a processing unit (fig. 3 shows power line with TDR and fig. 4 shows the processing unit);
wherein the reflectometry generator is configured to be connected to a conductor of the electrical system (fig. 3 shows TDR connected to power line) and configured to:
inject an electrical signal into the conductor during a measurement time period (paragraph 0006 discloses a pulse of energy is transmitted down a cable); and
receive a reflected electrical signal from the conductor during the measurement time period (paragraph 0006 discloses a pulse of energy is transmitted down a cable. When that pulse reaches the end of the cable, or a fault along the cable, part or all of the pulse energy is reflected back to the instrument. TDR measures the time it takes for the signal to travel down the cable, see the problem, and reflect back; fig. 1-2 show the reflected signal), the reflected electrical signal (fig. 1-2) being produced by reflection of the injected electrical signal paragraph 0006 discloses a pulse of energy is transmitted down a cable) at one or more points at which an impedance of the conductor changes (paragraph 0011 discloses a signature or characteristics of electrical energy reflected from a tap on a power line differs from the signature or characteristics of energy reflected by other variations in the power line impedance),
wherein the processing unit is (fig. 4) configured to:
correlate the injected electrical signal and the reflected electrical signal to produce a measured waveform, the measured waveform indicative of a measured state of the electrical system during the measurement time period (fig. 4 and paragraph 0022 show and discloses a TDR/FDR Block 38, to transmit and receive TDR and FDR test signals onto the Powerline network during the moments of time when there are no normal PLC data communication events occurring. The device can be configured to either transmit, and receive a response from, a nearly instantaneous, or spike of energy (TDR), or transmit, and receive a response from, a predefined set of sine waves representing a test signal with preprogrammed energy levels over a range of carrier frequencies (FDR));
obtain, from a storage device, a predetermined baseline waveform indicative of a baseline state of the electrical system during a calibration time period (paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections (implied from the storage) when the power line is correctly connected and operational and is without any unauthorized taps);
analyse the difference waveform to determine if there is a change of state in the electrical system between the calibration time period and the time measurement period (paragraph 0011 discloses signature or characteristics of electrical energy reflected from a tap on a power line differs from the signature or characteristics of energy reflected by other variations in the power line impedance, e.g. reflections from the open end of a line, a break in the line, a component in series with the line, etc. Therefore, the reflected energy can be analyzed and taps on the line, both authorized and unauthorized, can be identified and paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections);
wherein analysing the difference waveform comprises comparing the difference waveform with two or more stored difference waveforms, wherein each of the two or more stored difference waveforms corresponds to a known change of state (paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections when the power line is correctly connected and operational and is without any unauthorized taps. When the comparison indicates that there is an unauthorized tap, the location of the unauthorized tap is noted from the data and appropriate action is taken, such as physically finding the unauthorized tap, removing it and taking action with respect to the installer of the unauthorized tap).
Logvinov does not disclose
generate a difference waveform based on the measured waveform and the baseline waveform;
Khan discloses generating a difference waveform based on the measured waveform and the baseline waveform (fig. 4 step 420 and paragraph 052 discloses calculate different data between step 410 acquires SSTDR data and previously acquired baseline. Fig. 3s shows the graphical of the differences)
Khan further discloses:
correlating the injected electrical signal and the reflected electrical signal to produce a measured waveform, the measured waveform indicative of a measured state of the electrical system during the measurement time period (fig. 1-2 of Khan show the analysis 120 included an evaluation unit 128 to determine the state of the electrical system based on the signal 113B);
analysing the difference waveform to determine if there is a change of state in the electrical system between the calibration time period and the measurement time period (paragraph 0039 discloses 120 and 120 may further comprise an evaluation module 128 configured to determine a) whether a fault exists in the PV electrical system 140, and/or b) a location of the fault by use of the difference data 126).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to a POSITA to incorporate Khan into Logvinov in order to determine impedance mismatches of electrical systems that comprise large numbers of interconnections.
Regarding to claim 18, Logvinov discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions for execution by a processor (paragraph 0024 and fig. 4 shows a processing circuit included PLC Software/Hardware Control Block 30) of a monitoring apparatus in electrical connection with a conductor of an electrical system (fig. 3 shows power line with TDR), wherein the instructions are configured to cause the processor to:
correlate an injected electrical signal injected into the conductor during a measurement time period and a reflected electrical signal received during the measurement time period to produce a measured waveform (fig. 4 and paragraph 0022 show and discloses a TDR/FDR Block 38, to transmit and receive TDR and FDR test signals onto the Powerline network during the moments of time when there are no normal PLC data communication events occurring. The device can be configured to either transmit, and receive a response from, a nearly instantaneous, or spike of energy (TDR), or transmit, and receive a response from, a predefined set of sine waves representing a test signal with preprogrammed energy levels over a range of carrier frequencies (FDR)), the measured waveform indicative of a measured state of the electrical system during the measurement time period, the reflected electrical signal being produced by reflection of the injected electrical signal at one or more points at which an impedance of the conductor changes (paragraph 0011 discloses signature or characteristics of electrical energy reflected from a tap on a power line differs from the signature or characteristics of energy reflected by other variations in the power line impedance, e.g. reflections from the open end of a line, a break in the line, a component in series with the line, etc. and paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections);
obtain, from a storage device, a predetermined baseline waveform indicative of a baseline state of the electrical system during a calibration time period (paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections (implied from the storage) when the power line is correctly connected and operational and is without any unauthorized taps);
analyse the difference waveform to determine if there is a change of state in the electrical system between the calibration time period and the measurement time period (paragraph 0011 discloses signature or characteristics of electrical energy reflected from a tap on a power line differs from the signature or characteristics of energy reflected by other variations in the power line impedance, e.g. reflections from the open end of a line, a break in the line, a component in series with the line, etc. Therefore, the reflected energy can be analyzed and taps on the line, both authorized and unauthorized, can be identified and paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections),
wherein analysing the difference waveform comprises comparing the difference waveform with two or more stored difference waveforms, wherein each of the two or more stored difference waveforms corresponds to a known change of state (paragraph 0012 discloses the reflected energy is analyzed and compared with an analysis previously made of the reflections when the power line is correctly connected and operational and is without any unauthorized taps. When the comparison indicates that there is an unauthorized tap, the location of the unauthorized tap is noted from the data and appropriate action is taken, such as physically finding the unauthorized tap, removing it and taking action with respect to the installer of the unauthorized tap).
Logvinov does not disclose
generate a difference waveform based on the measured waveform and the baseline waveform.
Khan discloses generating a difference waveform based on the measured waveform and the baseline waveform (fig. 4 step 420 and paragraph 052 discloses calculate different data between step 410 acquires SSTDR data and previously acquired baseline. Fig. 3s shows the graphical of the differences)
Khan further discloses:
correlate an injected electrical signal injected into the conductor during a measurement time period and a reflected electrical signal received during the measurement time period to produce a measured waveform (fig. 1-2 of Khan show the analysis 120 included an evaluation unit 128 to determine the state of the electrical system based on the signal 113B);
analyse the difference waveform to determine if there is a change of state in the electrical system between the calibration time period and the measurement time period (paragraph 0039 discloses 120 and 120 may further comprise an evaluation module 128 configured to determine a) whether a fault exists in the PV electrical system 140, and/or b) a location of the fault by use of the difference data 126).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to a POSITA to incorporate Khan into Logvinov in order to determine impedance mismatches of electrical systems that comprise large numbers of interconnections.
Regarding to claim 19, Logvinov in view of Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the electrical system comprises a permanently earthed section for use by a railway, a tram or a trolleybus (fig. 3 of Logvinov shows the homes power line system (which is permanently earth section) instead of overhead line equipment for use by the railway, tram or trolleybus. However, this is an intended use).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to use the TDR to detect the state of the electrical system comprises a permanently earthed section for use by a railway, a tram or a trolleybus without unexpected results.
Regarding to claim 20, Logvinov in view of Khan discloses the method of claim 19, wherein the permanently earthed section is part of overhead line equipment for use by the railway, tram or trolleybus (fig. 3 of Logvinov shows the homes power line system (which is permanently earth section) instead of overhead line equipment for use by the railway, tram or trolleybus. However, this is an intended use).
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to use the TDR to detect the state of the electrical system comprises a permanently earthed section for use by a railway, a tram or a trolleybus without unexpected results.
Regarding to claim 22, Logvinov in view of Khan discloses the method of claim 21, except wherein the change of state in the electrical system corresponds with removal of any portion of the conductor, the isolator, the jumper, or the dropper.
Paragraph 0012 of Logvinov discloses to use the TDR to determine unauthorized tap and removing it.
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to a POSITA to use the TDR to detect the state of the electrical system to detect the change of the electrical system due to removal of any portion of the conductor, the isolator, the jumper, or the dropper as a matter of intended use.
Regarding to claim 23, Logvinov in view of Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the change of state in the electrical system corresponds with an unauthorized modification or removal of any portion of the conductor (abstract of Logvinov discloses to determine whether or not unauthorized taps are present).
Claim(s) 8, 14 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logvinov in view of Khan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Franke.
Regarding to claim 8, Logvinov in view of Khan discloses the method of claim 1, except wherein analysing the difference waveform comprises inputting the difference waveform into a trained classifier for determining if there is a change of state in the electrical system.
Abstract of Franke discloses method for testing a network included recording training measured values for a number of reference networks; training a first classification system using the training measured values, wherein the first classification system is based on at least one algorithm from the field of machine learning and is designed to classify a network either as fault-free or faulty, training a second classification system using the training measured values.
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to a POSITA to incorporate Franke into Logvinov in view of Khan in order to recognize the defect location or position with very high accuracy (paragraph 0027 of Franke).
Regarding to claim 14, Logvinov in view of Khan discloses the method of claim 13, except further comprising training a classifier by inputting the plurality of sets of reflectometry data and corresponding simulated change of state of the system into the classifier.
Abstract of Franke discloses method for testing a network included recording training measured values for a number of reference networks; training a first classification system using the training measured values, wherein the first classification system is based on at least one algorithm from the field of machine learning and is designed to classify a network either as fault-free or faulty, training a second classification system using the training measured values.
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to a POSITA to incorporate Franke into Logvinov in view of Khan in order to recognize the defect location or position with very high accuracy (paragraph 0027 of Franke).
Regarding to claim 17, Logvinov in view of Khan discloses the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the processing unit is located on a server remote to the electrical system (abstract of Logvinov discloses a remote control center).
However, Khan does not disclose the processing unit is located on a server.
Franke discloses a test device (fig. 4[200]) include processing unit and paragraph 0033-34 discloses a central server.
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to a POSITA to incorporate a remote server as a matter of choice of data communication.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Logvinov in view of Khan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Whyte (US 4012733, hereinafter Whyte).
Regarding to claim 21, Logvinov in view of Khan discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the electrical ground connection points are permanently earthed sections (fig. 3 of Logvinov shows the homes power line system (which is permanently earth section) except for use by a railway, a tram, or a trolleybus, wherein the electrical system further comprises an isolator configured to impede current along the conductor, a jumper configured to allow current to bypass the isolator, a messenger cable, and a dropper configured to maintain the conductor at a predetermined distance from the conductor, and wherein the isolator, the jumper, the messenger cable, and the dropper are each connected to the conductor and the electrical ground connection points.
However, the electrical ground connection points are permanently earthed sections for use by a railway, a tram, or a trolleybus is an intended use. Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to use the TDR to detect the state of the electrical system comprises a permanently earthed section for use by a railway, a tram or a trolleybus without unexpected results.
Whyte discloses a distribution power line communication systems included isolators, messenger cables … which are accessories inherently included in the electrical system.
Therefore, at the time before the effective filing date, it would be obvious to a POSITA to use the TDR to detect the state of the electrical system comprises a permanently earthed section for use by a railway, a tram or a trolleybus wherein the electrical system further comprises an isolator configured to impede current along the conductor, a jumper configured to allow current to bypass the isolator, a messenger cable, and a dropper configured to maintain the conductor at a predetermined distance from the conductor, and wherein the isolator, the jumper, the messenger cable, and the dropper are each connected to the conductor and the electrical ground connection points as a matter of intended use without unexpected results.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SON T LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5818. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 7AM - 4PM.
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 5712724448. 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.
/SON T LE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858