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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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) 1-5, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452
Regarding claim 1, Sarkozi teaches a fault detection system for detecting an electrical fault in a component, the fault detection system comprising:
an optical conductor comprising a first end and a second end and configured to optically face a supply wire of the component(Fig. 8; optical fiber 804; conductor 802, 808);
a first sensor and a second sensor operably coupled to the first end and the second end, respectively, each of the first sensor and the second sensor configured to detect electromagnetic (EM) radiation propagating within the optical conductor (Fig. 8; sensor 820 and 824); and
a controller module communicatively coupled to the first sensor and the second sensor(Fig. 8; processor 822);
wherein, when an electrical fault in the component generates an incident EM pulse on the optical conductor, the controller module is configured to determine a fault location of the electrical fault in the component, and to provide an output indicating the fault location (Fig. 8 and 10b; processor calculates location of the PD).
Sarkozi is silent in wherein the fault in the supply wire is based at least in part on a spacing distance between the supply wire and the optical conductor, and to provide an output indicating the fault location in the supply wire. Kim teaches wherein a fault in a supply device is based at least in part on a spacing distance between the supply device and an optical conductor (Fig. 8; distance LD from an arc generating position and optical fiber 110 estimated), and to provide an output indicating the fault location in the supply device (Fig. 1; arc position detector 400 detects position of the arc). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Kim into Sarkozi for the benefit of accurately detecting an arc generating position.
Regarding claim 2, Sarkozi teaches wherein the controller module is further configured to: receive a first signal from the first sensor indicative of the incident EM pulse propagating through the optical conductor toward the first end; receive a second signal from the second sensor indicative of the incident EM pulse propagating through the optical conductor toward the second end; determine a time delay between the first signal and the second signal; and determine the fault location based on the time delay (Fig. 10b; t1, t2 difference).
Regarding claim 3, Sarkozi teaches wherein the component comprises a supply wire configured to connect a power source to an electrical load, and wherein the optical conductor is configured to extend in a direction at least partially aligned with the supply wire (Fig. 8; as shown).
Regarding claim 4, Sarkozi teaches wherein the fault location comprises at least one of a single position or a range of positions along the supply wire (Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 5, Sarkozi teaches further comprising a bundle with multiple supply wires and having the supply wire (¶[0025]).
Regarding claim 20, Sarkozi teaches a method of determining a location of an electrical fault in a component, the method comprising: receiving, in a controller module having a processor and a machine-readable medium, at least a first signal and a second signal from a first sensor and a second sensor (Fig. 8; sensor 820 and 824), respectively, with the first signal and the second signal indicative of an incident electromagnetic pulse due to an electrical fault in at least one supply wire of the component (Fig. 8; conductor 808, 802); comparing, by the controller module, the first signal and the second signal to determine a time delay(Fig. 10b; t1, t2 difference); and determining, by the controller module, a fault location of the electrical fault in the component based on the time delay (Fig. 8 and 10b; processor calculates location of the PD).
Sarkozi is silent in wherein the fault in the supply wire is based at least in part on a spacing distance, the spacing distance being between the at least one supply wire and the optical conductor. Kim teaches wherein a fault in a supply device is based at least in part on a spacing distance between the supply device and an optical conductor (Fig. 8; distance LD from an arc generating position and optical fiber 110 estimated). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Kim into Sarkozi for the benefit of accurately detecting an arc generating position.
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452 in view of Bagga et al., US 20210341547
Regarding claim 6, Sarkozi is silent in wherein the fault location comprises an identification of the supply wire in the multiple supply wires having the electrical fault. Bagga teaches wherein the fault location comprises an identification of the supply wire in the multiple supply wires having the electrical fault (Fig. 1; ¶[0038]; computer 106 identifies which wire is faulty). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Bagga into Sarkozi for the benefit of providing the specific faulty wire so that the wire can be repaired without changing out a subsystem or harness.
Claim(s) 7, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452 in view of Radun, US 10601218
Regarding claim 7, Sarkozi teaches wherein the optical conductor, the first sensor, the second sensor, and the controller module collectively define a fault detection module and wherein the module determines the location of the fault. Sarkozi is silent in wherein the fault detection system comprises multiple fault detection modules each configured to determine the electrical fault in corresponding multiple supply wires. Radun teaches multiple fault detection modules each configured to determine an electrical fault in corresponding multiple supply wires (Fig. 2; controller 22; LRUs 24; Col. 3 lines 15-55). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Radun into Sarkozi for the benefit of determining a type of fault in the system.
Regarding claim 8, Sarkozi is silent in further comprising a system controller module in signal communication with the multiple fault detection modules, wherein the system controller module is configured to: receive a set of first signals from a first fault detection module indicative of an incident EM pulse on a first optical conductor; receive a set of second signals from a second fault detection module indicative of an EM pulse on a second optical conductor; compare the set of first signals with the set of second signals; and determine a relationship between the set of first signals and the set of second signals based on the comparison. Radun teaches a system controller module in signal communication with the multiple fault detection modules, wherein the system controller module is configured to: receive a set of first signals from a first fault detection module; receive a set of second signals from a second fault detection module; compare the set of first signals with the set of second signals; and determine a relationship between the set of first signals and the set of second signals based on the comparison (Col. 3 lines 15-55). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Radun into Sarkozi for the benefit of determining a type of fault in the system.
Claim(s) 9, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452 in view of Chamoun et al., US 20230213570
Regarding claim 9, Sarkozi is silent in further comprising at least one optical filter operably coupled to the optical conductor and configured to filter EM waves transmitted through the optical conductor between the first and second ends. Chamoun teaches at least one optical filter operably coupled to the optical conductor and configured to filter EM waves transmitted through an optical conductor between a first and second end [¶[0032]; bandpass filter 326]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Chamoun into Sarkozi for the benefit of rejecting out of band noise.
Regarding claim 10, Sarkozi is silent in wherein the at least one optical filter comprises at least one of: a bandpass filter coupled to the optical conductor at a location between the first and second ends, a fiber Bragg grating extending along at least a first portion of the optical conductor, or an optical coating on at least a second portion of the optical conductor. Chamoun teaches wherein the at least one optical filter comprises at least one of: a bandpass filter coupled to the optical conductor at a location between the first and second ends, a fiber Bragg grating extending along at least a first portion of the optical conductor, or an optical coating on at least a second portion of the optical conductor [¶[0032]; bandpass filter 326]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Chamoun into Sarkozi for the benefit of rejecting out of band noise.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452 in view of Patterson et al., US 5,365,175
Regarding claim 11, Sarkozi teaches wherein the optical conductor comprises a fiber optic cable but is silent in the fiber optic cable configured to form a loop about at least a portion of the component. Patterson teaches a fiber optic cable configured to form a loop about at least a portion of the component (Fig. 6; fiber optic 70 looped around conductor). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Patterson into Sarkozi for the benefit of detecting defects on multiple locations of the component.
Claim(s) 12, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452 in view of White et al., US 20130286515
Regarding claim 12, Sarkozi teaches a power distribution system for supplying electrical power, comprising: a power distribution node configured to receive electrical power from at least one power source (Fig. 8; voltage source 826 provides electrical power); a supply wire electrically configured to supply electrical power from the power source (Fig. 8; conductors 802, 808); and a fault detection system, comprising: an optical conductor comprising a first end and a second end and extending in a direction at least partially aligned with the supply wire (Fig. 8; optical fiber 804); and a first sensor operably coupled to the first end, and a second sensor operably coupled to the second end, wherein the first sensor and the second sensor are each configured to detect electromagnetic (EM) radiation within the optical conductor(Fig. 8; sensor 820 and 824); and a controller module communicatively coupled with the first sensor and the second sensor(Fig. 8; processor 822); wherein, when an electrical fault in the supply wire generates an incident EM pulse on the optical conductor, the controller module is configured to determine a fault location of the electrical fault in the supply wire, and to provide an output indicating the fault location(Fig. 8 and 10b; processor calculates location of the PD).
Sarkozi does not explicitly disclose at least one electrical load and a power distribution node comprising a node input configured to receive electrical power from at least one power source, and a node output configured to provide electrical power; a supply wire electrically coupled to the node output and configured to supply electrical power from the node output to the at least one electrical load and wherein the fault in the supply wire is based at least in part on a spacing distance between the supply wire and the optical conductor. Kim teaches wherein a fault in a supply device is based at least in part on a spacing distance between the supply device and an optical conductor (Fig. 8; distance LD from an arc generating position and optical fiber 110 estimated). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Kim into Sarkozi for the benefit of accurately detecting an arc generating position.
White teaches at least one electrical load (Fig. 1; loads 112) and a power distribution node comprising a node input configured to receive electrical power from at least one power source and a node output configured to provide electrical power (Fig. 1; feeder line 110 receive power from generator 106); a supply wire electrically coupled to the node output and configured to supply electrical power from the node output to the at least one electrical load (Fig. feeder line 116 to loads 112). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of White into Sarkozi for the benefit of providing efficient power fault detection in multiple environments.
Regarding claim 13, Sarkozi teaches wherein the controller module is further configured to: receive a first signal from the first sensor indicative of the incident EM pulse propagating through the optical conductor toward the first end; receive a second signal from the second sensor indicative of the incident EM pulse propagating through the optical conductor toward the second end; determine a time delay between the first signal and the second signal; and determine the fault location based on the time delay (Fig. 10b; t1, t2 difference).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452 in view of White et al., US 20130286515 in view of Bagga et al., US 20210341547
Regarding claim 14, Sarkozi teaches a bundle with multiple supply wires and having the supply wire (¶[0025]), but is silent in wherein the fault location comprises an identification of the supply wire in the bundle having the electrical fault. Bagga teaches wherein the fault location comprises an identification of the supply wire in the bundle having the electrical fault (Fig. 1; ¶[0038]; computer 106 identifies which wire is faulty). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Bagga into Sarkozi for the benefit of providing the specific faulty wire so that the wire can be repaired without changing out a subsystem or harness.
Claim(s) 15, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452 in view of White et al., US 20130286515 in view of Radun, US 10601218
Regarding claim 15, Sarkozi teaches wherein the optical conductor, the first sensor, the second sensor, and the controller module collectively define a fault detection module configured to determine a fault location. Sarkozi is silent in wherein the fault detection system comprises multiple fault detection modules each configured to determine an electrical fault in corresponding multiple supply wires. Radun teaches multiple fault detection modules each configured to determine an electrical fault in corresponding multiple supply wires (Col. 3 lines 15-55). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Radun into Sarkozi for the benefit of determining a type of fault in the system.
Regarding claim 16, Sarkozi is silent in further comprising a system controller module in signal communication with the multiple fault detection modules, wherein the system controller module is configured to: receive a set of first signals from a first fault detection module indicative of an incident EM pulse on a first optical conductor; receive a set of second signals from a second fault detection module indicative of an EM pulse on a second optical conductor; compare the set of first signals with the set of second signals; and determine a relationship between the set of first signals and the set of second signals based on the comparison. Radun teaches a system controller module in signal communication with the multiple fault detection modules, wherein the system controller module is configured to: receive a set of first signals from a first fault detection module indicative of an incident EM pulse on a first optical conductor; receive a set of second signals from a second fault detection module indicative of an EM pulse on a second optical conductor; compare the set of first signals with the set of second signals; and determine a relationship between the set of first signals and the set of second signals based on the comparison (Col. 3 lines 15-55). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Radun into Sarkozi for the benefit of determining a type of fault in the system.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452 in view of White et al., US 20130286515 in view of Hoff et al., US 20160139196 A1
Regarding claim 17, Sarkozi is silent in wherein the controller module further comprises a power controller configured to controllably operate the node output for selectively supplying power to the at least one electrical load based on the output. Hoff teaches a power controller configured to controllably operate the node output for selectively supplying power to the at least one electrical load based on the output (¶[0044]; system implementing the electric cable is switched off when arc is detected). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Hoff into Sarkozi for the benefit of shutting off power to systems for increased safety measures.
Claim(s) 18, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sarkozi et al., US 2005/0134837 in view of Kim, KR 102026452 in view of White et al., US 20130286515 in view of Chamoun et al., US 20230213570
Regarding claim 18, Sarkozi is silent in further comprising an optical filter operably coupled to the optical conductor and configured to filter EM waves transmitted through the optical conductor between the first and second ends. Chamoun teaches an optical filter operably coupled to the optical conductor and configured to filter EM waves transmitted through the optical conductor between the first and second ends [¶[0032]; bandpass filter 326]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Chamoun into Sarkozi for the benefit of rejecting out of band noise.
Regarding claim 19, Sarkozi is silent in wherein the controller module is further configured to determine a signal modification by the optical filter for at least one of the first signal or the second signal. Chamoun teaches determining a signal modification by the optical filter for at least one of the first signal or the second signal (¶[0032]; matching sensitivity band of coupling with filter 326 is a determination of signal modification). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Chamoun into Sarkozi for the benefit of rejecting out of band noise.
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 FEBA POTHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9219. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-2258. 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.
/FEBA POTHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2858