DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is in response to the election filed on 11/18/25.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
3. Applicant's election with traverse of Species 4, figures 7A, (directed to all claims) in the reply filed on 11/18/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “there exists considerable overlapping subject matter between all of Figs 7 and 8. Thus, any field of search for one invention would necessarily overlap with the field of search for the other invention. Hence, it would not be a serious burden on the Examiner to examine all figures 7 and 8 as they are closely related and the difference limited to the type of rectifier used. claims presented in this case. Moreover, restriction in this matter would be contrary to current USPTO policy. More specifically, maintaining a restriction between the species would impede the examination process and further contribute to the overall backlog of applications at the USPTO. In view hereof, there would not appear to be any burden, let alone a serious search and examination burden, if restriction were not required. If the search and examination of an entire application can be made without serious burden, the examiner must examine it on the merits, even though it includes claims to independent or distinct inventions. See MPEP 803 (emphasis added).”
This is found persuasive. The requirement mailed on 11/18/25 has been withdrawn.
Drawings
4. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore,
“a DC source” and “a DC-to-DC converter” (in claims 5 and 15)
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Double Patenting
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-6, 8-9, 11-16, and 18-19 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,081,014 (hereafter, 014’) in view of Wei et at. (US 20100177452).
Regarding claim 1: 014’ disclsoes a power supply system to provide power to a load connected between first and second connectors, the system comprising: a power source that produces a power output; a power converter that configured to receive the power output and convert it into a direct current (DC) output and provides the DC output between the first and second connectors; a filter connected to the rectifier and between the connectors and that is configured to smooth the DC output; and a fault clearing source connected to the first connector that is configured to provide a clearing voltage to the first connector when a ground fault occurs on the first connector (i.e. see claim 1),
but does not specifically disclose wherein the clearing voltage includes an identifiable characteristic.
Wei et al. disclose a power system comprising the clearing voltage (i.e. from 34) includes an identifiable characteristic (i.e. provided by 34) (i.e. ¶ 30 and 36-41).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of 014’s invention with the system as disclose by Wei et al. to provide a protective circuit with the lowest power ratings for the additional components.
Regarding claim 2: 014’ disclsoes the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the identifiable characteristic is a frequency, a square wave, a sinusoid, a pulse, or other distinctive and detectable pattern.
Wei et al. disclose a power system comprising the identifiable characteristic is a frequency, a square wave, a sinusoid, a pulse, or other distinctive and detectable pattern (i.e. provided by the capacitor 38 and/or resistor 36). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of 014’s invention with the system as disclose by Wei et al. to provide a protective circuit with the lowest power ratings for the additional components.
Regarding claims 3 and 13: 014’ disclsoes wherein the fault clearing source is a battery (i.e. see claim 2).
Regarding claim 4: 014’ discloses wherein the fault clearing source receives power from the second connector (i.e. see claim 3).
Regarding claims 5 and 15: wherein the power source is a DC source and the power converter is a DC to DC converter (i.e. see the rejection of claim 5 below).
Regarding claims 6 and 16: 014’ disclsoes the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the power source is an AC generator and the power converter is a rectifier configured to receive the AC power from the generator and converts it into a direct current output and provide the DC output between the first and second connectors.
Wei et al. disclose a power system (i.e. figure 6) wherein the power source (i.e. 18) is an AC generator and the power converter is a rectifier (i.e. 12) configured to receive the AC power from the generator (i.e. 18) and converts it into a direct current output (i.e. from 12) and provide the DC output between the first (i.e. 20) and second connectors (i.e. 22).
Regarding claim 9: 014’ disclsoes the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the fault clearing source is connected between the first connector and a ground.
Wei et al. disclose a power system comprising wherein the fault clearing source (i.e. source of 34 that includes 36, 38, 40) is connected between the first connector (i.e. 20) and a ground (i.e. ground).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of 014’s invention with the system as disclose by Wei et al. to provide a protective circuit with the lowest power ratings for the additional components.
Regarding claim 11: 014’ disclsoes power supply system to provide power to a load connected between first and second connectors, the system comprising: a power source that produces a power output; a power converter configured to receive the power output, convert it into a direct current (DC) output and provide the DC output between the first and second connectors; a filter connected to the rectifier and between the connectors configured to smooth the DC output; and a first fault clearing source connected to the first connector configured to provide a first clearing voltage to the first connector when a first ground fault occurs on the first connector (i.e. see claim 1),
but does not specifically disclose a second fault clearing source connected to the second connector configured to provide a second clearing voltage to the second connector when a ground fault occurs on the second connector; wherein at least one of the first and second clearing voltages includes an identifiable characteristic.
Wei et al. disclose a power system comprising a second fault clearing source (i.e. lower source includes 36, 42, 38) connected to the second connector (i.e. 22) configured to provide a second clearing voltage (i.e. from lower 38, 42, 38) to the second connector (i.e. 22) when a ground fault (i.e. ground fault) occurs on the second connector (i.e. 22) (i.e. ¶ 30 and 36-41);
wherein at least one of the first and second clearing voltages (i.e. from upper and lower source of 34) includes an identifiable characteristic (i.e. provided by 34).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of 014’s invention with the system as disclose by Wei et al. to provide a protective circuit with the lowest power ratings for the additional components.
Regarding claim 14: 014’ disclsoes the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the first fault clearing source receives power from the second connector and the second fault clearing source receives power from the first connector.
Wei et al. disclose a power system comprising (i.e. figure 6) wherein the first fault clearing source (i.e. upper source includes 36, 38, 40) receives power from the second connector (i.e. 22) and the second fault clearing source (i.e. lower source includes 36, 42, 38) receives power from the first connector (i.e. 20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of 014’s invention with the system as disclose by Wei et al. to provide a protective circuit with the lowest power ratings for the additional components.
Regarding claim 18: 014’ disclsoes the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the fault clearing source is connected between the first connector and a ground.
Wei et al. disclose a power system comprising (i.e. figure 6) wherein the first fault clearing source (i.e. upper source includes 36, 38, 40) is connected between the first connector (i.e. 20) and a ground (i.e. ground) and the second fault clearing source (i.e. lower source includes 36, 42, 38) is connected between the second connector (i.e. 22) and ground (i.e. ground).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of 014’s invention with the system as disclose by Wei et al. to provide a protective circuit with the lowest power ratings for the additional components.
7. Claims 7 and 17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 12,081,014 (hereafter, 014’) in view of Wei et at. (US 20100177452) and further in view of Loder (US 2020013319).
Regarding claims 7 and 17: 014’ discloses the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the rectifier is a two stage active rectifier.
Loder discloses a power system (i.e. figure 2) comprising the rectifier is a two stage active rectifier (i.e. 242, 244).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of 014’’s invention with the power system as disclose by Loder for reducing the thermal stress may ensure lower voltages across the components in the electrical power system.
8. Claims 10 and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 12,081,014 (hereafter, 014’) in view of Legatti (US 6525914).
Regarding claims 10 and 19: 014’ discloses the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the ground is an airframe ground.
Legatti discloses a protection system having the ground is an airframe ground (i.e. Col. 4, lines 6-24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the circuit of 014’’s invention with the system as disclose by Legatti, because an appliance or tool having three lines would normally have its metal housing or frame connected to the ground line such that arcing to the metal housing or frame would be detected by the ground fault current interrupter circuit.
Claim Objections
9. Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 18 recites “ground” should be replaced with “the ground”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
10. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
11. Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 11 recites the limitation “the rectifier”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-10 and 12-19 are rejected due to their dependency of claims 1 and 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
12. 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.
13. Claims 1-2, 4, 6, 9, 11-12, 14, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wei et at. (US 20100177452).
Regarding claim 1: Wei et al. discloses a power supply system (i.e. figure 6) to provide power to a load (i.e. 16, 32) connected between first (i.e. 20) and second connectors (i.e. 22), the system comprising:
a power source (i.e. 18) that produces a power output (i.e. output of 18);
a power converter (i.e. converter of 12) that configured to receive the power output (i.e. output of 18) and convert it into a direct current (DC) output (i.e. from 12) and provides the DC output between the first (i.e. 20) and second connectors (i.e. 22);
a filter (i.e. 26, 28) connected to the rectifier (i.e. 12) and between the connectors (i.e. 22) (i.e. 20) and that is configured to smooth the DC output (i.e. function of 26, 28); and
a fault clearing source (i.e. source of 34) connected to the first connector (i.e. 20) that is configured to provide a clearing voltage (i.e. from 34) to the first connector (i.e. 20) when a ground fault (i.e. ground fault) occurs on the first connector (i.e. 20);
wherein the clearing voltage (i.e. from 34) includes an identifiable characteristic (i.e. provided by 34) (i.e. ¶ 30 and 36-41).
Regarding claims 2 and 12: (i.e. figure 6) wherein the identifiable characteristic is a frequency, a square wave, a sinusoid, a pulse, or other distinctive and detectable pattern (i.e. provided by the capacitor 38 and/or resistor 36).
Regarding claim 4: (i.e. figure 6) wherein the fault clearing source (i.e. from source 34) receives power from the second connector (i.e. 22) (i.e. ¶ 30 and 36-41).
Regarding claims 6 and 16: (i.e. figure 6) wherein the power source (i.e. 18) is an AC generator and the power converter is a rectifier (i.e. 12) configured to receive the AC power from the generator (i.e. 18) and converts it into a direct current output (i.e. from 12) and provide the DC output between the first (i.e. 20) and second connectors (i.e. 22).
Regarding claim 9: wherein the fault clearing source (i.e. source of 34 that includes 36, 38, 40) is connected between the first connector (i.e. 20) and a ground (i.e. ground).
Regarding claim 11: Wei et al. disclose a power supply system (i.e. figure 6) to provide power to a load (i.e. 16, 32) connected between first (i.e. 20) and second connectors (i.e. 22), the system comprising:
a power source (i.e. 18) that produces a power output (i.e. output of 18);
a power converter (i.e. converter of 12) configured to receive the power output (i.e. output of 18), convert it into a direct current (DC) output (i.e. from 12) and provide the DC output between the first (i.e. 20) and second connectors (i.e. 22);
a filter (i.e. 26, 28) connected to the rectifier (i.e. 12) and between the connectors (i.e. 20) (i.e. 22) configured to smooth the DC output (i.e. function of 26, 28); and
a first fault clearing source (i.e. upper source includes 36, 38, 40) connected to the first connector (i.e. 20) configured to provide a first clearing voltage (i.e. from upper 36, 38, 40) to the first connector (i.e. 20) when a first ground fault (i.e. ground fault) occurs on the first connector (i.e. 20); and
a second fault clearing source (i.e. lower source includes 36, 42, 38) connected to the second connector (i.e. 22) configured to provide a second clearing voltage (i.e. from lower 38, 42, 38) to the second connector (i.e. 22) when a ground fault (i.e. ground fault) occurs on the second connector (i.e. 22) (i.e. ¶ 30 and 36-41);
wherein at least one of the first and second clearing voltages (i.e. from upper and lower source of 34) includes an identifiable characteristic (i.e. provided by 34).
Regarding claim 14: (i.e. figure 6) wherein the first fault clearing source (i.e. upper source includes 36, 38, 40) receives power from the second connector (i.e. 22) and the second fault clearing source (i.e. lower source includes 36, 42, 38) receives power from the first connector (i.e. 20).
Regarding claim 18: (i.e. figure 6) wherein the first fault clearing source (i.e. upper source includes 36, 38, 40) is connected between the first connector (i.e. 20) and a ground (i.e. ground) and the second fault clearing source (i.e. lower source includes 36, 42, 38) is connected between the second connector (i.e. 22) and ground (i.e. ground).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
14. 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.
15. Claims 3, 5, and 15 are rejected under U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Wei et at. (US 20100177452).
Regarding claims 3 and 13: Wei et al. disclose (i.e. figure 6) comprising the fault clearing source (i.e. 34) having a capacitor (i.e. 38) to discharge a voltage to the DC bus line or connector (i.e. 20) instead of a battery. Wei et al.’s capacitor (i.e. 34) is an equivalent structure known in the art. Therefore, because the capacitor and battery were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute the capacitor for a battery to have the same voltage provided and easier to replace.
Regarding claims 5 and 15: Wei et al. discloses the claimed invention except for the power source is a DC source and the power converter is a DC-to-DC converter. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify Wei et al.’s invention to have the power source is a DC source and the power converter is a DC-to-DC converter as an alternative configuration to achieve different power source. Since, applicant has not disclosed that the power source is a DC source and the power converter is a DC-to-DC converter. solve any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with the power source of Wei et al.’s invention.
16. Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Wei et at. (US 20100177452) in view of Loder (US 2020013319).
Regarding claims 7 and 17: Wei et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the rectifier is a two stage active rectifier.
Loder discloses a power system (i.e. figure 2) comprising the rectifier is a two stage active rectifier (i.e. 242, 244).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to modify the circuit of Wei et al.’s invention with the power system as disclose by Loder for reducing the thermal stress may ensure lower voltages across the components in the electrical power system.
17. Claims 10 and 19 are rejected under U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Wei et at. (US 20100177452) in view of Legatti (US 6525914).
Regarding claims 10 and 19: Wei et al. disclose the limitation of the claim(s) as discussed above, but does not specifically disclose the ground is an airframe ground.
Legatti discloses a protection system having the ground is an airframe ground (i.e. Col. 4, lines 6-24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the circuit of Wei et al.’s invention with the system as disclose by Legatti, because an appliance or tool having three lines would normally have its metal housing or frame connected to the ground line such that arcing to the metal housing or frame would be detected by the ground fault current interrupter circuit.
Allowable Subject Matter
18. Claim 8 is 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.
Conclusion
19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1269. The examiner can normally be reached Flex: M-F 8-7.
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, Monica Lewis can be reached at 571-272-1838. 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.
/Nguyen Tran/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838