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 .
Drawings
The drawings objection for failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s replacement drawings.
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 1-5, 7, 9-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ball [US 2023/0245836].
Claim 1, Ball discloses a fused disconnect switch [200], comprising: a fuse carrier [20/306] to house a fuse [paragraph 0112]; an actuator [12] configured to reversibly engage and disengage with the fuse carrier; a common trip link [50], mechanically coupled to move in concert with the actuator [paragraph 0088]; and a contact arm [26], indirectly mechanically coupled to the common trip link, wherein, when the fuse carrier is disposed in an engaged position, the contact arm is free to move into a closed position to make electrical contact with a fixed contact [28; paragraph 0093], and wherein, when the fuse carrier is in a disengage position, the contact arm is prevented from moving into the closed position [paragraph 0093].
Claim 2, Ball discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 1, wherein, when the fuse carrier is moved out of the engaged position while the contact arm is in contact with the fixed contact, the actuator is configured to trigger the common trip link to disconnect the contact arm from the fixed contact [paragraph 0093].
Claim 3, Ball discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 1, wherein the actuator [12] comprises a first arm [64] to engage a surface of the fuse carrier [paragraph 0091], and further comprises a second arm 60] that is biased [via spring 60] against the common trip link [50].
Claim 4, Ball discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 3, further comprising an escapement assembly [38], coupled between the common trip link [50] and the contact arm [26; figure 2], wherein the escapement assembly is held in an open position when the fuse carrier is in the disengage position [, actuator 12 prevents rotation of switch 34 which contains common trip link 38; paragraph 0093].
Claim 5, Ball discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 4, wherein the common trip link [50; figure 4] comprises an upper arm [58] to engage the second arm [60] of the actuator [12], and wherein the common trip link comprises a lower arm [56] to engage the escapement assembly [38].
Claim 7, Ball discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 1, further comprising: a housing [figure 8dc, housing of module 204], arranged to enclose the fuse when the fuse carrier is disposed in the engaged position [figure 8c]; and a reset handle [34/242], extending externally to the housing [figures 3 and 8c], wherein the contact arm is prevented from moving to the closed position when the reset handle is moved from an open to closed position, when the fuse carrier is in a disengage position [paragraph 0093].
Claim 9, Ball discloses a disconnect module [200], comprising: a relay module [202]; and a fused disconnect switch [200], coupled to the relay module [paragraphs 0101-0102], comprising: a fuse carrier [20/306] to house a fuse [paragraph 0112]; an actuator [12] configured to reversibly engage and disengage with the fuse carrier; a common trip link [50], mechanically coupled to move in concert with the actuator [paragraph 0088]; and a contact arm [26], indirectly mechanically coupled to the common trip link, wherein, when the fuse carrier is disposed in an engaged position, the contact arm is free to move into a closed position to make electrical contact with a fixed contact [28; paragraph 0093], and wherein, when the fuse carrier is in a disengage position, the contact arm is prevented from moving into the closed position [paragraph 0093].
Claim 10, Ball discloses the disconnect module of claim 9, wherein, when the fuse carrier is moved out of the engaged position while the contact arm is in contact with the fixed contact, the actuator is configured to trigger the common trip link to disconnect the contact arm from the fixed contact [paragraph 0093].
Claim 11, Ball discloses the disconnect module of claim 9, wherein the actuator [12] comprises a first arm [64] to engage a surface of the fuse carrier [paragraph 0091], and further comprises a second arm 60] that is biased [via spring 60] against the common trip link [50].
Claim 12, Ball discloses the disconnect module of claim 11, further comprising an escapement assembly [38], coupled between the common trip link [50] and the contact arm [26; figure 2], wherein the escapement assembly is held in an open position when the fuse carrier is in the disengage position [, actuator 12 prevents rotation of switch 34 which contains common trip link 38; paragraph 0093].
Claim 13, Ball discloses the disconnect module of claim 12, wherein the common trip link [50; figure 4] comprises an upper arm [58] to engage the second arm [60] of the actuator [12], and wherein the common trip link comprises a lower arm [56] to engage the escapement assembly [38].
Claim 15, Ball discloses the disconnect module of claim 9, further comprising: a housing [figure 8dc, housing of module 204], arranged to enclose the fuse when the fuse carrier is disposed in the engaged position [figure 8c]; and a reset handle [34/242], extending externally to the housing [figures 3 and 8c], wherein the contact arm is prevented from moving to the closed position when the reset handle is moved from an open to closed position, when the fuse carrier is in a disengage position [paragraph 0093].
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9-12, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Myers [US 3,474,373].
Claim 1, Myers discloses a fused disconnect switch [figure 1], for overcurrent protection, comprising: a fuse carrier [190] to house a fuse [50]; an actuator [194] configured to reversibly engage and disengage with the fuse carrier; a common trip link [140], mechanically coupled to move in concert with the actuator; and a contact arm [106], indirectly mechanically coupled to the common trip link, wherein, when the fuse carrier is disposed in an engaged position, the contact arm is free to move into a closed position to make electrical contact with a fixed contact [102], and wherein, when the fuse carrier is in a disengage position, the contact arm is prevented from moving into the closed position [col. 5 line 65 to col. 6 line 9].
Claim 2, Myers discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 1, wherein, when the fuse carrier [190] is moved out of the engaged position while the contact arm [106] is in contact with the fixed contact [102], the actuator is configured to trigger the common trip link to disconnect the contact arm from the fixed contact [col. 6 lines 16-21].
Claim 3, Myers discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 1, wherein the actuator [194; figure 12] comprises a first arm [202] to engage a surface of the fuse carrier [col. 5 lines 50-54], and further comprises a second arm [201] that is biased [via 198] against the common trip link.
Claim 4, Myers discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 3, further comprising an escapement assembly [140], coupled between the common trip link [194] and the contact arm, wherein the escapement assembly is held in an open position when the fuse carrier is in the disengage position [col. 6 lines 16-21].
Claim 6, Myers discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 4, further comprising a shunt trip coil [130], and an armature [166], wherein the shunt trip coil is arranged to receive an external voltage that magnetically couples the shunt trip coil to the armature, wherein the armature is mechanically coupled to the escapement assembly [140 via 144] to reversibly disconnect the contact arm [col. 4 lines 59-72].
Claim 7, Myers discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 1, further comprising: a housing [22, 24], arranged to enclose the fuse [50] when the fuse carrier [19] is disposed in the engaged position; and a reset handle [116], extending externally to the housing, wherein the contact arm is prevented from moving to the closed position when the reset handle is moved from an open to closed position, when the fuse carrier is in a disengage position [col. 6 lines 16-21].
Claim 9, Myers discloses a disconnect module, comprising a relay module [left side of figure 2; contact switching portion]; and a fused disconnect switch [[left side of figure 2; fuse portion], for overcurrent protection, comprising: a fuse carrier [190] to house a fuse [50]; an actuator [194] configured to reversibly engage and disengage with the fuse carrier; a common trip link [140], mechanically coupled to move in concert with the actuator; and a contact arm [106], indirectly mechanically coupled to the common trip link, wherein, when the fuse carrier is disposed in an engaged position, the contact arm is free to move into a closed position to make electrical contact with a fixed contact [102], and wherein, when the fuse carrier is in a disengage position, the contact arm is prevented from moving into the closed position [col. 5 line 65 to col. 6 line 9].
Claim 10, Myers discloses the disconnect module of claim 9, wherein, when the fuse carrier [190] is moved out of the engaged position while the contact arm [106] is in contact with the fixed contact [102], the actuator is configured to trigger the common trip link to disconnect the contact arm from the fixed contact [col. 6 lines 16-21].
Claim 11, Myers discloses disconnect module of claim 9, wherein the actuator [194; figure 12] comprises a first arm [202] to engage a surface of the fuse carrier [col. 5 lines 50-54], and further comprises a second arm [201] that is biased [via 198] against the common trip link.
Claim 12, Myers discloses the disconnect module of claim 11, further comprising an escapement assembly [140], coupled between the common trip link [194] and the contact arm, wherein the escapement assembly is held in an open position when the fuse carrier is in the disengage position [col. 6 lines 16-21].
Claim 14, Myers discloses disconnect module of claim 12, further comprising a shunt trip coil [130], and an armature [166], wherein the shunt trip coil is arranged to receive an external voltage that magnetically couples the shunt trip coil to the armature, wherein the armature is mechanically coupled to the escapement assembly [140 via 144] to reversibly disconnect the contact arm [col. 4 lines 59-72].
Claim 15, Myers discloses disconnect module of claim 9, further comprising: a housing [22, 24], arranged to enclose the fuse [50] when the fuse carrier [19] is disposed in the engaged position; and a reset handle [116], extending externally to the housing, wherein the contact arm is prevented from moving to the closed position when the reset handle is moved from an open to closed position, when the fuse carrier is in a disengage position [col. 6 lines 16-21].
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ball [US 2023/0245836].
Claim 8, Ball discloses the fused disconnect switch of claim 1, the fuse carrier further comprising: a visual indication of the state of the fuse [24; paragraph 0082] but fails to specifically teach a resistor; a light bulb; and a light pipe, arranged to generate an indicator signal when a fuse in the fuse carrier is blown. It would have been an obvious matter of design to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the visual indicator from a resistor; a light bulb; and a light pipe as Ball is silent on the details of the visual indicator and the recited elements are well known, since applicant has not disclosed that a visual indicator comprising a resistor; a light bulb; and a light pipe solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with visual indicator of Ball [paragraph 0082].
Claim 16, Ball discloses the module of claim 9, the fuse carrier further comprising: a visual indication of the state of the fuse [24; paragraph 0082] but fails to specifically teach a resistor; a light bulb; and a light pipe, arranged to generate an indicator signal when a fuse in the fuse carrier is blown. It would have been an obvious matter of design to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the visual indicator from a resistor; a light bulb; and a light pipe as Ball is silent on the details of the visual indicator and the recited elements are well known, since applicant has not disclosed that a visual indicator comprising a resistor; a light bulb; and a light pipe solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with visual indicator of Ball [paragraph 0082].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that independent claims 1 and 9 are not anticipated by Ball because “in the claimed invention, the engagement and disengagement of the fuse carrier physically moves the actuator, which continuously moves the common trip link along with it” and “Ball utilizes a vertical drop latch [82] to rigidly lock the slide joint [60] in place, rather than providing an actuator that pivots and moves a common trip link in concert upon disengagement of the fuse carrier…”
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies 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). Applicant’s arguments improperly imports limitations into claims 1 and 9 that are found only in the specification. Independent claims 1 and 9 broadly recite an actuator configured to reversively engage and disengage with the fuse carrier, and a common trip link mechanically coupled to move in concert with the actuator. Neither claim requires a pivoting motion or continuous direct camming. Disengagement of Ball’s fuse causes movement of rejection pin [88], which moves latch [82] in concert to mechanically couple with and actuate upon slide joint [60] / base [50], thereby locking the mechanism and preventing the contact arm from moving into the closed position. Under BRI, this coordinated mechanical interaction meets with claimed movement. Therefore, Ball anticipates claims 1 and 9.
Applicant also argues that independent claims 1 and 9 are not anticipated by Myers because “Myers fails to discloses a common trip link that is mechanically coupled to move in concert with the actuator. In Myers, the interlock lever [194] is not mechanically coupled to move or continuously or in concert with the cradle [140]. Instead, Myers teaches a trigger-and-release mechanism where striking a bimetallic element to release a latch so an independent spring throws a cradle does not constitutes being mechanically coupled to move in concert.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies 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). Applicant is again reading unrecited limitations into independent claims 1 and 9. The claims do not require a continuous or unlatched mechanical engagement, nor do they exclude trigger-and-release mechanisms. In Myers, movement of interlock lever [194] directly acts on latch element [124/154] to release and cause the coordinated movement of cradle [140] to disconnect the contact arm. Myers therefore discloses the claimed linkage under BRI and anticipates claims 1 and 9.
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 Bernard Rojas whose telephone number is (571)272-1998. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. thru Fri. 7:00 am - 4:00 pm.
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, Shawki S Ismail can be reached at (571) 272-3985. 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.
/BERNARD ROJAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
