DETAILED ACTION
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
1. Applicant's arguments filed 04/21/2026 have been fully considered. In view of the arguments, the examiner agrees with the applicant’s arguments that Fife does not explicitly disclose wherein the first surge arrester and the second surge arrester are configured to be disconnected from the electric system in a sequential predetermined order.
However, the examiner respectively disagrees with following arguments:
Applicant argued that regarding the first criterion (same field of endeavor) the present invention belongs to the field of medium and high voltage surge arrester technology for electric power distribution systems. The
surge arresters of the present claims are column-type varistor devices enclosed in polymeric insulating housings, standing approximately one meter tall when installed for distribution voltages, connected between energized overhead distribution lines operating at tens of kilovolts and a grounded structure, and specifically designed to absorb the enormous electromagnetic energy associated with direct lightning strokes (events that can deliver tens of kilojoules in microseconds). These devices are governed by IEEE C62.11, IEC 60099-4, and related standards for distribution surge arresters. They are installed outdoors on electric poles and transformer substations, are expected to function reliably for twenty or more years without maintenance under rain, ice, UV radiation, and extreme temperature conditions, and their failure mode (the overload that triggers the ground lead disconnector) is a thermal-mechanical event produced by cumulative varistor degradation under repeated high-energy surge events.
In response to applicant's argument with respect to the first and second criterion that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies:
(the surge arresters are column-type varistor devices enclosed in polymeric insulating housings, standing approximately one meter tall when installed for distribution voltages, connected between energized overhead distribution lines operating at tens of kilovolts and a grounded structure, and specifically designed to absorb the enormous electromagnetic energy associated with direct lightning strokes (events that can deliver tens of kilojoules in microseconds). These devices are governed by IEEE C62.11, IEC 60099-4, and related standards for distribution surge arresters. They are installed outdoors on electric poles and transformer substations, are expected to function reliably for twenty or more years without maintenance under rain, ice, UV radiation, and extreme temperature conditions, and their failure mode (the overload that triggers the ground lead disconnector) (for the first criterion).
(when a distribution surge arrester fails due to energy overload and its ground lead disconnector isolates it from the circuit, the protected equipment (a transformer or a section of distribution line) becomes unprotected until a maintenance crew arrives and installs a replacement arrester. In areas of high lightning density, this unprotected period can last hours and represents a significant risk of equipment damage or loss. The solution claimed addresses this problem by installing a second distribution surge arrester in parallel with the first, with deliberately different electrical characteristics, so that the second arrester remains in service as a standing redundant backup when the first reaches end-of-life overload) (the second criterion).
are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Redding et al (USPN 6535369).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
2. Claims 1-9, 17-21, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fife (USPN 2011/0211290) in view of Redding et al (USPN 6535369).
Regarding claims 1, 8, 9, Fife discloses a surge protection device (a surge protection device 100 shown in figure 1) for protecting an electric system (a system 115) against overvoltage occurrences, the surge protection device comprising:
a first surge arrester (a first surge arrester 130);
a second surge arrester (a second surge arrester 150) electrically connected in parallel to the first surge arrester (130) (e.g. see par. 0021);
wherein the first surge arrester (130) has dissimilar discharge voltage and voltage-current characteristics in relation to the second surge arrester (150) (the first surge arrester 130 configured to have a first clamping voltage which is lower than a second clamping voltage of the second surge arrester 150, see par. 0019, 0027, because the first and second surge arresters 130, 150 configured to have a different clamping voltage capacity so they also have different voltage current characteristics see par. 0023, 0024); and keeping the electric system protected (a redundant protected) until the last one of the first surge arrester and the second surge arrester is disconnected (e.g. see par. 0031-0032, 0036).
wherein the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) are connectable to ground (GND conductor 110) and to the electric system (100) which is to be protected.
Fife does teach the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) are configured to discharge a surge voltage in sequence (see par. 0027), but does not explicitly disclose the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) configured to be disconnected in a sequential predetermined order as claimed.
Redding discloses a surge protection device (see figure 3) comprises a first surge arrester (a first surge arrester 56) and a second surge arrester (a second surge arrester 56), the first and second surge arresters are coupled in parallel,
wherein the first surge arrester (56) and the second surge arrester (56) are configured to be disconnected (by associated switches 55) from an electric system (12) in a sequential predetermined order as each one is overloaded and becomes unusable as a surge arrester, keeping the electric system (12) protected (a backup protection) until the last one is disconnected (see col. 5, lines 31-65) (e.g. when the first surge arrester 56, which is nearing failure or begging to fail, causes overcurrent and overtemperature conditions, the first surge arrester (56) is disconnected from the system (12) via a switch (55) , and the second surge arrester (56) provides a backup surge protection by the operation of the switch (55) and keeping the electric system (12) protected (a backup protection) until the last one is disconnected (see col. 5, lines 31-65),
wherein the second surge arrester (the second surge arrester 56) is arranged to be disconnected from the electric system (12(via the switch 55) when it is overloaded and becomes unusable as a surge arrester (the failure of the second surge arrester 56 due to an overcurrent and overtemperature, see col. 5, lines 40-65).
It 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 to have modified the surge arrester device of Fife to incorporate a surge arrester as disclosed by Redding in order to provide a continuous surge protection to a load from high voltage transients while giving a user adequate time to replace the failed surge arrester.
Regarding claim 2, Fife discloses said discharge voltage (the surge voltages clamped by the first and second arresters 130, 150, see par. 0023-0024) and voltage-current characteristics of each one of first surge arrester and second surge arrester comply with the protection characteristics required for the electric system (100) to be protected (the arresters 130, 150 configured to prevent the voltage surges from reaching a required level protection of the system 100, see par. 0026).
Regarding claim 3, Fife discloses wherein the electric system is selected from a group of an electric power generation system, an electric power transmission system, an electric power distribution line, an electric transformer and electric reactor (see par. 0022).
Regarding claim 4, Fife discloses wherein the either or both surge arresters (130, 150) are connectable to the electric system (100) to be protected with a conductor (conductors 105) or indirectly through an air gap.
Regarding claim 5, Fife discloses wherein the either or both surge arresters (130, 150) are connectable to the ground (GND) with a conductor (branching
conductors coupled between the conductors 105 and the ground conductor 110) or indirectly through an air gap.
Regarding claim 6, Fife discloses wherein the second surge arrester (150) is connectable to the electric system (100) to be protected with a conductor (a branching conductor shown in figure 1) or indirectly through an air gap.
Regarding claim 7, Fife discloses wherein the second surge arrester (150) is connectable to the ground (GND conductor 110) with a conductor (a branching conductor of the second arrester 145) or indirectly through an air gap.
Regarding claims 17, 19, 20, Fife discloses a method for protecting an electric system (a system 100 shown in figure 1) against overvoltage occurrences (surge voltages), the method comprising:
providing a first surge arrester (a first surge arrester 130) and a second surge arrester (a second surge arrester 150), wherein the first surge arrester (130) has dissimilar discharge voltage and voltage-current characteristics in relation to the second surge arrester (150) (the first surge arrester 130 configured to have a first clamping voltage which is lower than a second clamping voltage of the second surge arrester 150, see par. 0019, 0027, because the first and second surge arresters 130, 150 configured to have a different clamping voltage capacity so they also have different voltage current characteristics see par. 0023, 0024);
connecting the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) in parallel (see figure 1, par 0021);
connecting the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) to ground (GND);
connecting the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) to the electric system (100);
and keeping the electric system protected (a redundant protected) until the last one of the first surge arrester and the second surge arrester is disconnected (e.g. see par. 0031-0032, 0036).
Fife does teach the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) are configured to discharge a surge voltage in sequence (see par. 0027), but does not explicitly disclose disconnecting the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) in a sequential predetermined order as claimed.
Redding discloses a surge protection device (see figure 3) comprises a first surge arrester (a first surge arrester 56) and a second surge arrester (a second surge arrester 56), the first and second surge arresters are coupled in parallel,
wherein the first surge arrester (56) and the second surge arrester (56) are configured to be disconnected (by associated switches 55) from an electric system (12) in a sequential predetermined order as each one is overloaded and becomes unusable as a surge arrester, keeping the electric system (12) protected (a backup protection) until the last one is disconnected (see col. 5, lines 31-65) (e.g. when the first surge arrester 56, which is nearing failure or begging to fail, causes overcurrent and overtemperature conditions, the first surge arrester (56) is disconnected from the system (12) via a switch (55) , and the second surge arrester (56) provides a backup surge protection by the operation of the switch (55) and keeping the electric system (12) protected (a backup protection) until the last one is disconnected (see col. 5, lines 31-65),
disconnecting the second surge arrester (the second surge arrester 56) from the electric system (12(via the switch 55) when the second surge arrester (56) is overloaded and becomes unusable as a surge arrester (the failure of the second surge arrester 56 due to an overcurrent and overtemperature, see col. 5, lines 40-65).
It 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 to have modified the surge arrester device of Fife to incorporate a surge arrester as disclosed by Redding in order to provide a continuous surge protection to a load from high voltage transients while giving a user adequate time to replace the failed surge arrester.
Regarding claim 18, Fife discloses wherein in the step of providing a first surge arrester (130) and a second surge arrester (150), said discharge voltage (clamping voltages) and voltage-current characteristics of each one of first surge arrester (130) and second surge arrester (150) compliance with the protection characteristics required for the electric system (100) to be protected (the arresters 130, 150 configured to prevent the voltage surges from reaching a required level protection of the system 100, see par. 0026), and the first surge arrester (130) is predetermined to start to conduct a current before the second surge arrester when an overvoltage occurs in the electric system (see par. 0026-0027).
Regarding claims 21, 23, Fife discloses a surge protection device (see figure 1) for protecting an electric system (100) against overvoltage occurrences, the surge protection device comprising:
two or more surge arresters (130, 150) electrically connected in parallel (see par. 0021 and figure 1), wherein said surge arresters have dissimilar discharge voltage and voltage-current characteristics between them (the first surge arrester 130 configured to have a first clamping voltage which is lower than a second clamping voltage of the second surge arrester 150, see par. 0019, 0027, because the first and second surge arresters 130, 150 configured to have a different clamping voltage capacity so they also have different voltage current characteristics see par. 0023, 0024);
wherein said surge arresters (130, 150) are connectable to ground (GND) and to the electric system (100) which is to be protected; and
remaining the electric system protected until the last one is disconnected (see par. 0031-0032),
wherein each surge arrester (each surge arrester 56 shown in figure 3) is isolated upon an overload by a separate device (42) selected from the group consisting of a ground lead disconnector, an electronic switch, a mechanical switch (a mechanical switch 55), a fuse, and combinations thereof, from a surge arrester body.
Fife does teach the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) are configured to discharge a surge voltage in sequence (see par. 0027), but does not explicitly disclose the first surge arrester (130) and the second surge arrester (150) configured to be disconnected in a sequential predetermined order as claimed.
Redding discloses a surge protection device (see figure 3) comprises a first surge arrester (a first surge arrester 56) and a second surge arrester (a second surge arrester 56), the first and second surge arresters are coupled in parallel,
wherein the first surge arrester (56) and the second surge arrester (56) are configured to be disconnected (by associated switches 55) from an electric system (12) in a sequential predetermined order as each one is overloaded and becomes unusable as a surge arrester, keeping the electric system (12) protected (a backup protection) until the last one is disconnected (see col. 5, lines 31-65) (e.g. when the first surge arrester 56, which is nearing failure or begging to fail, causes overcurrent and overtemperature conditions, the first surge arrester (56) is disconnected from the system (12) via a switch (55) , and the second surge arrester (56) provides a backup surge protection by the operation of the switch (55) and keeping the electric system (12) protected (a backup protection) until the last one is disconnected (see col. 5, lines 31-65),
wherein the second surge arrester (the second surge arrester 56) is arranged to be disconnected from the electric system (12(via the switch 55) when it is overloaded and becomes unusable as a surge arrester (the failure of the second surge arrester 56 due to an overcurrent and overtemperature, see col. 5, lines 40-65).
It 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 to have modified the surge arrester device of Fife to incorporate a surge arrester as disclosed by Redding in order to provide a continuous surge protection to a load from high voltage transients while giving a user adequate time to replace the failed surge arrester.
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claim 22 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.
4. Claims 10-16 are allowed over prior art of record.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application as a whole either taken alone or in combination, in particular, prior art of record does not teach:
An electric system adapted to be subjected to voltages comprising: an electric distribution transformer having at least one high-voltage bushing; anda surge protection device comprising: a first surge arrester; a second surge arrester electrically connected in parallel to the first surge arrester; wherein the first surge arrester has dissimilar discharge voltage and voltage- current characteristics in relation to the second surge arrester; wherein the first surge arrester and the second surge arrester are connected to a ground and to the high-voltage bushing; wherein the first surge arrester and the second surge arrester are configured to be disconnected from the electric distribution transformer in a sequential predetermined order as each one is overloaded and becomes unusable as a surge arrester, keeping the electric distribution transformer protected until the last one is disconnected as recited in claim 10.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANNY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2054. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM-4:30PM.
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 571-271-1838. 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.
/DANNY NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights