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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-3 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (CN 204012103)
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a high voltage shore connection (HVSC) system for connection of a vessel in port to electrical supply from the shore-side (see Fig. 1 and 2), said system comprising:
a first intake comprising at least one first connecting element (see junction boxes para 0008 and 0020);
a second intake comprising at least one second connecting element, said second intake being in electrical connection with said first intake (see junction boxes para 0008 and 0020);
said at least one first connecting element and said at least one second connecting element being connectable to a power supply element for supplying onshore electricity (see para 0020);
a safety circuit element being in electrical connection with said first intake and said second intake (see safe connection protection cover);
wherein said (112) system further comprises at least one protecting element being connectable to said at least one first connecting element or said at least one second connecting element, whichever connecting element not being connected to said power supply element (see safe connection protection cover);
said at least one protecting element comprising a safety loop being electrically connectable to said safety circuit element (see trip spring 4 and connecting conductor 5).
Regarding claim 2, Chen teaches wherein said vessel comprises a safety circuit, said safety circuit element is arranged to interlock said safety circuit (see para 0022).
Regarding claim 3, Chen teaches wherein said first intake is arranged on the port side of said vessel and said second intake is arranged on the starboard side of said vessel (see para 0022, the location would not change the electrical function of the intakes).
Regarding claim 12, Chen teaches wherein said first intake and said second intake are arranged in parallel electrical connection (see Fig. 5; Chen).
Regarding claim 13, Chen teaches wherein said power supply element is attached to a shore power cable (see para 0020).
Regarding claim 14, Chen teaches wherein at least one of said first intake and said second intake comprises at least one cable reel comprising a ship power cable, and wherein said ship power cable is electrically connectable to said power supply element (see para 0004).
Regarding claim 15, Chen teaches a vessel comprising a HVSC system according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1).
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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen.
Regarding claim 16, Chen teaches first intake and said second intake of said HVSC system (see para 0022)
Yet does not disclose that is arranged on a port side of said vessel and said second intake is arranged on a starboard side of said vessel.
However, the claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique of rearranging parts to suit particular applications was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Further the location would not change the electrical function of the intakes.
Claims 4 -7, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Cissoko (EP 2980942B1).
Regarding claim 4, Chen teaches the HVSC system according to any one of the preceding claims.
Yet does not disclose wherein at least one of said at least one first connecting element and said at least one second connecting element is a female connecting element.
However, Cissoko in the same filed teaches at least one of said at least one first connecting element and said at least one second connecting element is a female connecting element (see 74 and 76, Fig. 4).
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 Chen with the teachings of Cissoko by having at least one of said at least one first connecting element and said at least one second connecting element is a female connecting element in order to ensure proper connection of devices and prevent malfunction and damage to equipment.
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches wherein said at least one protecting element is a male protecting element (see trip spring 4 and connecting conductor 5; Chen).
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches wherein at least one of said at least one first connecting element and said at least one second connecting element is a male connecting element (see 74 and 76, Fig. 4; Cissoko).
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches wherein said at least one protecting element is a female protecting element (see trip spring 4 and connecting conductor 5; Chen).
Regarding claim 9, Chen teaches The HVSC system according to claim 1.
Yet does not disclose wherein said HVSC system further comprises only one HVSC electromechanical switch arranged in electrical connection with said first intake and said second intake for distribution of electrical power from the first intake or the second intake to the electrical loads of the vessel.
However, Cissoko in the same filed teaches one HVSC electromechanical switch arranged in electrical connection with said first intake and said second intake for distribution of electrical power from the first intake or the second intake to the electrical loads of the vessel (see 38, 28, 44, 46, 56; Cissoko).
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 Chen with the teachings of Cissoko by having electromechanical switch arranged in electrical connection with said first intake and said second intake for distribution of electrical power from the first intake or the second intake to the electrical loads of the vessel in order to provide protection to the shore power source and ship side and thus preventing damages to equipment and generators.
Regarding claim 10, the combination teaches wherein said HVSC system further comprises a HVSC breaker arranged in electrical connection with said HVSC switch (see 38, 28, 44, 46, 56).
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Scott (US 2017/0053767).
Regarding claim 8, Chen teaches the HVSC system according to claim 1.
Yet does not disclose wherein said at least one protecting element comprises an electrically isolating material.
However, Scott in the same filed teaches that it is known to have protecting element comprises an electrically isolating material (see para 0015 and 0025).
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 Chen with the teachings of Scott by having a protecting element comprises an electrically isolating material in order to prevent electrical contact with seawater and preventing false trips and proper operation.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Cormenier (EP 2882052)
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches the HVSC system according to claim 1,
Yet does not disclose wherein said at least one protecting element is a plug according to IEC 80005-1 standard.
However, Cormenier teaches said at least one protecting element is a plug according to IEC 80005-1 standard (see para 0004).
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 Chen with the teachings of Thierry by having at least one protecting element is a plug according to IEC 80005-1 standard in order to ensure safe and efficient high-voltage shore power connections for ships, defining requirements for both shore-side and ship-side systems, and promoting reliable vessel operations in ports.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/09/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant alleges that The protective cover plate 1 of Chen, allegedly corresponding to the “at least one protecting element” as required by claim 1, does not comprise a safety loop electrically connectable to a safety circuit element as required by claim 1, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
First, the Examiner would like to remined applicant that all examination must be done under Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI), used to interpret the terms within a patent claim, giving them their "broadest reasonable meaning" as understood by someone skilled in the art. The BRI standard requires interpreting claim terms based on the ordinary meaning. With this consideration the claim limitation recites a safety circuit element being in electrical connection with said first intake and said second intake.
When considering BRI the pointed structure is clearly described by the prior art of record. In fact the claimed structure is and the prior art are similar and do the same function. No clear differences as currently claimed are present.
All other remarks are considered and not found persuasive.
Therefore, in order to expedite the prosecution of this application, the Examiner suggest that applicant amend the claims by including structural components that are different from the prior art applied in order to distinguish the claim invention from the prior art of record.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ELIM ORTIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7114. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-6:30pm.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached on (571) 272-7492. 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.
/ELIM ORTIZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2836