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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2026-06-22 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 2026-06-22 has been entered. Claim(s) 1-10 remain pending in this application. Claim(s) 1 has been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, on pages 5-7, with respect to claim(s) 1 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.
Applicant's arguments, starting on page 7 last paragraph, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that since Hirano does not disclose a circuit board, Hirano does not show a locational relationship between the circuit board and the bus bar and the temperature differential of the part adjacent to the bus bar, and therefore the combination of Manabu and Hirano does not disclose the features of the amended claim.
The examiner respectfully disagrees, as Manabu teaches a circuit board, as described in the rejection below. Manabu also teaches a heat dissipation plate (Fig 2A: 50) to draw heat away from the region where current flows, thus a temperature differential will be established where one side will necessarily be hotter than the other. See rejection below.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manabu et al. (JP-2020106302-A, from applicant IDS, refer to attached machine translation for references cited) in view of Yasunobe (JP-2011185648-A – Refer to attached machine translation for references cited).
Regarding Claim 1, Manabu teaches a current sensor comprising:
a bus bar (Fig 5-6: bus bar, 240) through which a current under measurement flows;
a magnetism detection element (Fig 4a: sensor element, 32); and
a chassis (Fig 5: main body, 230); wherein
the current sensor is mounted on a circuit board (Fig 5: wiring board, 10) in a state in which the chassis is inserted into an opening formed in the circuit board (Para [0038] with reference to Fig 5-6b teaches the main body, 230, inserted into an opening,14 , in the wiring board, 10) with a current path being provided on a mounting surface (Fig 5-6b: mounting surface, 11) and the bus bar is connected to the current path (Para [0036] teaches the bus bar electrically connected to the mounting surface, 11, and the current path, 13),
the bus bar has an incorporation portion placed in an interior of the chassis as well as externally connected portions extending from both ends of the incorporation portion, one from each side, toward an outside of the chassis (Para [0036] with reference to Fig 5-6b teaches the bus bar, 40, penetrating the main body, 230, and extending out from both sides, 230a & 230b. The incorporation portion would therefore be inside the main body, 230), and
when, in a first direction, which is a normal direction of the circuit board, a side on which the mounting surface is positioned is taken as an upper side and a side opposite to the upper side is taken as a lower side with respect to a center of the circuit board in the first direction (Can be seen in Fig 5),
the externally connected portions are positioned above a bottom surface of the chassis in the first direction (Can be seen in Fig 5, the bus bar is connected above the bottom surface of the main body, 231), and
a first region directly adjacent to the underneath portion of the incorporation portion (Fig 2A: heat dissipation plate, 50) has a lower temperature than a second region in the circuit board directly adjacent to each of the externally connected portions when the current sensor is mounted on the circuit board and the current flows in the bus bar (the region where heat is being dissipated will necessarily be cooler than a region where current is actively flowing).
Manabu does not teach the incorporation portion has an underneath portion positioned below the externally connected portions in the first direction. However, Yasunobe teaches the incorporation portion (Fig 7: recess, 42) has an underneath portion (Fig 7: bottom portion, 42A) positioned below the externally connected portions in the first direction (Can be seen in Fig 7). 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 Manabu to include the incorporation portion of Yasunobe. A motivation for this modification is a U-shaped section can concentrate magnetic field from the current on either side of the 'U' as which allows detection of relatively weak current flow as is known in the art.
Regarding Claim 2, Manabu further teaches wherein the bottom surface of the chassis is positioned below a back surface, which is a lower surface of the circuit board (Para [0029] teaches the bottom surface of the main body below the board bottom surface, 12).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Manabu in view of Yasunobe, as presented with respect to claim 1, teaches wherein the underneath portion has a bottom portion extending along the bottom surface of the chassis (the underneath portion, as taught by Yasunobe, when considered in the combination with Manabu, would necessarily extend along the bottom surface of the chassis of Manabu. – Examiner’s Note -- In the present rejection, the phrase “extending along” is given its broadest reasonable interpretation to mean extending parallel to), and
linking portions that extend upward from both ends of the bottom portion, one from each side, and each of which is connected to one of the externally connected portions (Refer to Annotated Fig 7 of Yasunobe). These features are necessarily taught by the combination of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Manabu in view of Yasunobe, as presented with respect to claim 4, teaches wherein the magnetism detection element (Yasunobe - Fig 7-8: current detection element, 22) is placed at a position, in the interior of the chassis, at which the magnetism detection element faces the bottom portion in the first direction (Can be seen in Annotated Fig 7 of Yasunobe). These features are necessarily taught by the combination of claim 4.
Regarding Claim 10, Manabu in view of Yasunobe teaches the current sensor according to Claim 1 (Refer to Claim 1 rejection); and Manabu further teaches the circuit board with the current path provided on the mounting surface (Manabu - Para 0036]).
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, T, Th, F 10:30-17:00 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
/DANIEL R MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights