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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2025-01-07 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 2025-01-07 has been entered. Claim(s) 1-9 remain pending in this application. Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 7 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2025-01-07 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that AAPA does not teach the that a straight line that passes through the magnetism sensing portion is NOT orthogonal to the elongating direction in the cross section when viewed from the third direction.
The examiner respectfully disagrees, AAPA does teach the features of the amended claim 1 as shown in the Annotated Figure 10 of AAPA presented below in this office action. This Figure has been annotated to more clearly indicate the examiner’s interpretation of the claim. As can be seen in the Annotated Figure, the elongating direction is the direction from when the opposing portion begins elongating to where it exits the chassis/enclosure at 102c. This direction is not orthogonal to the straight line that passes through the magnetism sensing portion.
PNG
media_image1.png
659
959
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 10 of AAPA
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Applicant’s admitted prior art (AAPA) found in the instant application.
Regarding Claim 1, AAPA teaches a current sensor comprising:
a bus bar through which a current under measurement flows (Fig 10: bus bar, 102;
a magnetism sensing portion placed so as to face the bus bar along a first direction (Fig 10: magnetism sensing portion, 103, the first direction being along the X-axis); and
a chassis that incorporates the magnetism sensing portion and part of the bus bar (Fig 10: chassis, 104);
wherein the bus bar has a first connection end protruding from one side of the chassis in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (Fig 10: the second direction is in the Y-axis direction, bus bar section 102a extends out of the chassis one side of the chassis), and the bus bar has a second connection end protruding from another side of the chassis in the second direction (Fig 10: the bus bar section 102c extends out of another side of the chassis in the 2nd direction),
the first connection end and the second connection end are at different positions along the first direction in a cross section when viewed from a third direction orthogonal to each of the first direction and the second direction, and the cross section is on a plane extending along the first and second directions (Can be seen in figure 10, when viewing along the Z-axis, which is the third direction, section 102a and 102c are at different elevations and therefore positions),
the bus bar has an opposing portion that directly faces the magnetism sensing portion along the first direction, and the opposing portion elongates along an elongating direction (Refer to the Annotated Figure 10 of AAPA), and
a straight line passing through the magnetism sensing portion is not orthogonal to the elongating direction in the cross section when viewed from the third direction, and the straight line is parallel to the first direction (Refer to the Annotated Figure 10 of AAPA).
Regarding Claim 4, AAPA teaches the current sensor according to Claim 1, further comprising a magnetic shield held in the chassis (Fig 10: magnetic shield, 106).
Regarding Claim 5, AAPA teaches the current sensor according to Claim 1, further comprising:
a first magnetic shield having a first flat plate potion formed in a first flat plate shape (Fig 10: magnetic shield, 106); and
a second magnetic shield having a second flat plate potion formed in a second flat plate shape (Fig 10: magnetic shield, 107); wherein
the first magnetic shield is placed at an opposite side of the magnetism sensing portion along the first direction with respect to the opposing portion,
a normal direction of a magnetic shield surface of the first flat plate portion becomes parallel to a normal direction of an opposing surface of the opposing portion in another cross section when viewed from the second direction, and the another cross section is on another plane extending along the first and third directions (Can be seen in Figure 10), and
the second magnetic shield is placed at an opposite side of the opposing portion along the first direction with respect to the magnetism sensing portion, and
a normal direction of a magnetic shield surface of the second flat plate portion becomes parallel to a normal direction of a sensing surface of the magnetism sensing portion in the another cross section when viewed from the second direction (Can be seen in Figure 10).
Regarding Claim 6, AAPA teaches the current sensor according to Claim 5, wherein: the chassis is composed of a case having a storage space (Can be seen in Figure 10 as the compartment housing the sensor, 103), which is open in the first direction, and a cover that covers the storage space (Though unlabeled, a cover can be seen above the sensor in the first direction (X1));
the magnetism sensing portion is stored in the storage space (can be seen in Figure 10);
the first magnetic shield and the opposing portion of the bus bar are insert-molded to the case (From figure 10 it is clear that the magnetic shield is an inseparable part of the casing. Though AAPA doesn't specifically reference it is "insert-molded" it has the same property of insert-molding such that it is inseparable); and
the second magnetic shield is insert-molded to the cover (is considered insert-molded for the same reasons as stated above regarding the first magnetic shield).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA in view of Ito et al. (US-20100194381-A1).
Regarding Claim 2, AAPA teaches a flat surface passes through a protruding portion of the first connection end and extends along the second direction and the third direction (See annotated Figure 10 of AAPA.). AAPA does not teach a distance between the opposing portion and a flat surface gradually becomes large from a side of the first connection end toward a side of the second connection end along the second direction. However, Ito teaches a distance between the opposing portion and a flat surface gradually becomes large from a side of the first connection end toward a side of the second connection end along the second direction (As seen in Figure 2, the bent region 21, gradually changes the elevation from the first connection end, 22, to the second connection end, 23. The flat surface would project along the line D in the figure, the line D being the second direction.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the bus bar of AAPA to have the bent portion of Ito. A motivation for this modification is to ensure the magnetic fields have minimal overlap with neighboring sensors, as taught in Ito (See abstract).
Regarding Claim 3, AAPA teaches the magnetism sensing portion has a sensing surface (Can be seen in Figure 10, facing the bus bar 102) and the magnetism sensing portion is placed so that a normal direction of the sensing surface is parallel to the first direction (Can be seen in Figure 10). AAPA does not teach the magnetism sensing portion is capable of sensing a magnetic field in a direction parallel to the sensing surface. However, Ito teaches the magnetism sensing portion is capable of sensing a magnetic field in a direction parallel to the sensing surface (Fig 3 shows the sensing detection direction 'S' (Para [0057]) as parallel to the surface of the sensor, 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the sensor of AAPA to sense parallel to its sensing surface as taught in Ito. A motivation for this modification is using a sensor with a detection direction as required to avoid as much magnetic interference as possible as taught in Ito in paragraph [0006].
Regarding Claim 9, AAPA teaches a structure including the bus bar and the magnetism sensing portion forms a measurement unit (Can be seen in Figure 10). AAPA does not explicitly teach a plurality of measurement units are placed along the third direction and are integrally held in the chassis.
However, Ito teaches a plurality of the measurement units (can be seen in Figure 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the measurement unit of AAPA to include a plurality of units as taught by Ito. A motivation for this modification is multiple units would be needed for three phase systems such as the one in Ito.
The combination of AAPA in view of Ito does not teach the measurement units placed along the third direction. However, it has been held In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) that it is within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art to rearrange components. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have rearranged the sensing portions of AAPA in view of Ito to extend along the third direction. A motivation for doing so would be spacing constraints requiring a certain arrangement.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA in view of Fukuhara et al. (US-20200158760-A1).
Regarding Claim 7, AAPA does not teach the magnetic shield has a base formed in a flat plate shape and side walls extending, from both ends of the base along the third direction, in a direction parallel to a normal direction of the base and toward a side on which the bus bar is present; and the magnetic shield is placed so that the normal direction of the base and a normal direction of the opposing portion become parallel to each other and the base and the opposing portion face each other in another cross section when viewed from the second direction, and the another cross section is on another plane extending along the first and third directions. However, Fukuhara teaches the magnetic shield has a base formed in a flat plate shape (Fig 2B: base plate portion, 29) and side walls (Fig 2B: side plate portions, 31 & 33) extending, from both ends of the base along the third direction (Fig 2B: lateral direction), in a direction parallel to a normal direction of the base (Can be seen in Fig 2B) and toward a side on which the bus bar is present (Can be seen in Figure 2B, the side walls of shield project toward the bus bar 3); and
the magnetic shield is placed so that the normal direction of the base and a normal direction of the opposing portion become parallel to each other and the base and the opposing portion face each other in another cross section when viewed from the second direction, and the another cross section is on another plane extending along the first and third directions. (Can be seen in Figure 2B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the shield of AAPA to incorporate the side walls of Fukuhara. A motivation for this change is to reduce the effect of an external magnetic field as taught in Fukuhara in paragraph [0103].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA in view of Tamura et al. (US-20240110952-A1).
Regarding Claim 8, AAPA does not teach the chassis has a heat sink portion on an opposite side of the magnetism sensing portion along the first direction with respect to the opposing portion. However, Tamura teaches the chassis has a heat sink portion (Fig 4: heat sink, 7) on an opposite side of the magnetism sensing portion along the first direction with respect to the opposing portion (Can be seen in Fig 4, the heat sink is on the opposite side of the sensor, 3, relative to the bus bar, 1.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the chassis of AAPA to incorporate the heat sink of Tamura. A motivation for this modification is that bus bars get hot when current runs through them and need to be cooled as taught in Tamura in paragraph [0003].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMIAH J BARRON whose telephone number is (571)272-0902. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 09:30-17:30 ET.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at (571) 270-5628. 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.
/JEREMIAH J BARRON/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858