DETAILED ACTION
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 Amendments
Claims 1-4 and 6-13 of U.S. Application 18/537,380 filed on January 02, 2026 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/29/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Entry of Amendments
Amendments to claims 1 and 10 have been entered.
Claim 5 has been cancelled.
Rejections under USC 102 and 103
Applicant's arguments filed on 01/02/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of a new rejection.
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 of this title, 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.
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, and 6-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanzisera et al (USPGPub 20180306846) in view of Friedrich et al (USPGPub 20150276434).
PNG
media_image1.png
570
681
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Prior Art: Lanzisera
Regarding claim 1, Lanzisera discloses a current sensor (100) for sensing the current through a first conductor (116) of a plurality thereof, the sensor comprising: at least one magnetic sensor (102) configured to provide a first signal representative of a magnetic field parameter comprising a magnetic field component in a first direction or a directional derivative of a component of the magnetic field (shown in fig 2), and configured to provide at least a second signal representative of a magnetic field parameter comprising a magnetic field component in a second direction different from the first direction or a directional derivative of that component of the magnetic field (par 6 and par 75 discloses representation of a magnetic field component), a processor (106) configured for deriving a signal indicative of the current based on a linear combination of the first signal and the at least second signal, wherein one of the first signal or at least second signal is weighted by a coefficient (multiply by a coefficient), wherein the coefficient is a constant chosen (predetermined) in accordance with a distance, in at least the first or second direction, between the sensor and at least one conductor of the plurality to reduce a contribution of a parasitic magnetic field (interference of a magnetic field) in the signal indicative of the current in the first conductor, where the parasitic magnetic field is generated by at least a further conductor (par 84 discloses using the sensors to reduce the interference caused by at least a second conductor. Therefore, reducing parasitic magnetic field). Lanzisera (for sake of argument) does not fully disclose wherein the at least one magnetic sensor and the processor are integrated in a single chip.
However, Friedrich discloses wherein the at least one magnetic sensor (504) and the processor (505) are integrated in a single chip (par 44 discloses the processor and magnetic field element can be located on the same chip or located at separate packages or assemblies).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lanzisera in view of Friedrich in order to simplify the device to reduce size of the circuity for cost benefits.
Regarding claim 2, Lanzisera discloses wherein the coefficient is chosen in accordance with the distance between the magnetic sensor and the first conductor (par 77 discloses distance may be offset by specific distances. Therefore, the coefficient is chosen based with the distance).
Regarding claim 4, Lanzisera discloses wherein the magnetic sensor comprises at least two magnetic sensing elements for measuring a gradient or a differential field in one direction (par 74 discloses determining gradients in a particular direction).
Regarding claim 6, Lanzisera discloses wherein the at least one magnetic sensor comprises a Hall effect sensor (par 72 discloses being a Hall sensor).
Regarding claim 7, Lanzisera discloses a current sensing system comprising a plurality of current conductors (having at least 116 and 632), each conductor comprising at least one current sensor, each sensor for sensing the current through each respective conductor, and for reducing the contribution of a parasitic magnetic field generated by the neighbouring conductors of the plurality (pars 80-84 discloses having a current sensor and reducing parasitic magnetic field by a nearby conductor).
Regarding claim 8, Lanzisera discloses wherein the coefficient of each sensor is a single coefficient optimized to minimize the cross talk of each respective conductor with respect to the other conductors (par 152 discloses helping to mitigate crosstalk).
Regarding claim 9, Lanzisera discloses wherein the current sensor is positioned along a portion of the conductor, wherein said portion is magnetically shielded (par 27 discloses shield electrodes from blocking field interference).
Regarding claim 10, Lanzisera discloses a method of reducing cross talk of a current sensor (100) for measuring current through a target conductor (116), comprising determining a first and a second magnetic field parameters at a sensing position (using 102), the parameters being a magnetic field component in a first direction or a directional derivative thereof, and a second magnetic field parameter in a second direction different from the first or a directional derivative thereof, where the parameters can be combined to obtain a value representing the current through a conductor (116) other than the target conductor, while current flows through a conductor other than the target conductor (par 6 and par 75 discloses representation of a magnetic field component), and calculating a weight coefficient (multiply by a coefficient) for which a combination of the obtained first and second field parameters of the magnetic field, obtained while current flows in a conductor other than the target conductor, results in a reduced contribution of parasitic magnetic field (interference of a magnetic field) from conductors other than the target conductor (par 84 discloses using the sensors to reduce the interference caused by at least a second conductor. Therefore, reducing parasitic magnetic field). Lanzisera (for sake of argument) does not fully disclose wherein the at least one magnetic sensor and the processor are integrated in a single chip.
However, Friedrich discloses wherein the at least one magnetic sensor (504) and the processor (505) are integrated in a single chip (par 44 discloses the processor and magnetic field element can be located on the same chip or located at separate packages or assemblies).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lanzisera in view of Friedrich in order to simplify the device to reduce size of the circuity for cost benefits.
Regarding claim 11, Lanzisera discloses comprises providing a current sensor at a sensing position, wherein determining the first and second magnetic field parameters comprises measuring the first and second magnetic field parameters (par 7 discloses measuring at least 2 magnetic fields).
Regarding claim 12, Lanzisera discloses determining the first and second magnetic field parameters for a predetermined current flowing through the conductor (par 69 discloses measuring current in a conductor).
Regarding claim 13, Lanzisera discloses wherein the first magnetic field parameter is the gradient of a first component in a direction between the conductor and the sensing position, where the gradient direction is perpendicular to the first component and also perpendicular to the current, and the second magnetic field parameter is the magnetic field component in a direction perpendicular to the first magnetic field component and also perpendicular to the current (par 73 discloses gradient of the components of x any y which are known to be perpendicular to the component and perpendicular to the current).
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 of this title, 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.
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 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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanzisera et al (USPGPub 20180306846) in view of Friedrich et al (USPGPub 20150276434) in further view of Yoon et al (USPGPub 20160011239).
Regarding claim 3, Lanzisera in view of Friedrich does not fully disclose wherein the coefficient is chosen in accordance with the distance, in a direction perpendicular to the distance between the magnetic sensor and the first conductor, between the magnetic sensor and a further conductor different from the first.
However, Yoon discloses wherein the coefficient is chosen in accordance with the distance, in a direction perpendicular to the distance between the magnetic sensor and the first conductor, between the magnetic sensor and a further conductor different from the first (par 44 discloses the coefficient is between the conductor and the magnetic sensor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lanzisera in view of Friedrich in further view of Yoon in order to determine current of the conductor based on the sensitivity and value of the coefficient.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cugat et al (USPGPub 20200284824): discloses conversion coefficient based on a first distance.
Uchaykin et al (US Pat No. 9465401): discloses two magnetic sensors integrated into the processor chip.
West et al (US Pat No 11024576): discloses an integrated circuit containing magnetic senser and controller.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC E HAWKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm EST.
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.
/DOMINIC E HAWKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858