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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 17/662,384, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
The U.S. Application No. 17/662,384, fails to provide support for Figures 9 and 10 and claimed features recited in claims 1, 7-11, and 17-20.
Therefore, the effective filling date of claims 1, 7-11, and 17-20 is March 19, 2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
Duty to Disclose: No Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) has been filed in the instant application. Examiner respectfully reminds Applicant of the duty of disclosure per 37 CFR 1.56 (a).
Drawings
The drawings were received on March 19, 2024. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1, 5-8, 11, 15, and 17-18 are objected to because of the following informalities (note that the markings show the examiner’s suggested amendments):
Claim 1, lines 9-10, “wherein the first criteria is if monitored temperatures exceed max safe temperature at any time and the second criteria is if the monitored temperatures increase at two”, should be change to - - wherein [[the]] a first criterion is if monitored temperatures exceed max safe temperature at any time and [[the]] a second criterion is if the monitored temperatures increase at two - -.
Claim 5, lines 1-2, “wherein an overvoltage component of the first and second overvoltage components is a Metal-Oxide Varistor (MOV) or a Transient”, should be change to - - wherein [[an]] the at least one overvoltage component comprises a first and a second overvoltage components; and the first and second overvoltage components is a Metal-Oxide Varistor (MOV) or a Transient - -.
Claim 6, line 1, “wherein when the overvoltage component”, should be change to - - wherein when the at least one overvoltage component - -.
Claim 7, lines 2-3, “overvoltage protection devices monitors temperature at different time to ensure it is the current leakage, not previous energy absorption”, should be change to - - the at least one overvoltage component monitors temperature at different time to ensure it is [[the]] a current leakage, not previous energy absorption - -.
Claim 8, line 1, “wherein if the temperature of the first and”, should be change to - - wherein the at least one overvoltage component comprises a first and a second overvoltage components; and wherein if the temperature of the first and - -.
Claim 11, lines 10-11, “wherein the first criteria is if monitored temperatures exceed max safe temperature at any time and the second criteria is if the monitored temperatures increase at two”, should be change to - - wherein [[the]] a first criterion is if monitored temperatures exceed max safe temperature at any time and [[the]] a second criterion is if the monitored temperatures increase at two - -.
Claim 15, lines 1-2, “wherein an overvoltage component of the first and second overvoltage components is a Metal-Oxide Varistor (MOV) or a Transient Voltage”, should be change to - - wherein [[an]] the at least one overvoltage component comprises a first and a second overvoltage components; and the first and second overvoltage components is a Metal-Oxide Varistor (MOV) or a Transient Voltage - -.
Claim 17, lines 1-2, “wherein a monitoring method for overvoltage protection devices monitors temperature at different time to ensure it is the current leakage”, should be change to - - wherein a monitoring method for the at least one overvoltage component monitors temperature at different time to ensure it is [[the]] a current leakage - -.
Claim 18, line 1, “wherein if the temperature of the first and second”, should be change to - - wherein the at least one overvoltage component comprises a first and a second overvoltage components; and wherein if the temperature of the first and second - -.
Appropriate correction is required.
Examiner’s Note: Applicant is required to carefully review all pending claims for the presence of any similar informalities and to correct them accordingly in order to place the claims in condition for allowance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 3-4, 7-10, 13-14 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With regard to claim(s) 3 and 13, the term “wide” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “wide” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
The limitation “the electronic circuit breaker is an arc-fault circuit interrupter (AFCI) configured to detect a wide range of arcing electrical faults” has been rendered infinite by the use of the term “wide” because the specification fails to provide which wide range of arcing electrical faults are detected. Clarification is required.
For purposes of the examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “the electronic circuit breaker is an arc-fault circuit interrupter (AFCI) configured to detect arcing electrical faults”.
With regard to claim(s) 4 and 14, the terms “advanced”, “faster”, and “extreme” are a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “advanced” and “faster”, and “extreme” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
The limitation “the electronic circuit breaker (ECB) replaces traditional moving parts of an electromechanical circuit breaker with semiconductors and advanced software algorithms that control power and can interrupt extreme currents faster” have been rendered infinite by the use of the terms “advanced” because the specification fails to provide a description of the software algorithms being advanced; also, the terms and “faster”, and “extreme” the specification does not provide a description of extreme currents faster than what. Clarification is required.
For purposes of the examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “the electronic circuit breaker (ECB) replaces traditional moving parts of an electromechanical circuit breaker with semiconductors and software algorithms that control power and can interrupt extreme currents”.
With regard to claim(s) 7 and 17, the limitation “a monitoring method for the at least one overvoltage component monitors temperature at different time to ensure it is a current leakage, not previous energy absorption” renders the claim vague and indefinite.
It is unclear the meaning of “not previous energy absorption”. The applicant specification recites in paragraph [0006] “MOVs are more often used for their lower cost and higher energy absorption.” But the specification fails to provide a description of “not previous energy absorption”.
For purposes of the examination, the limitation has been interpreted as “a monitoring method for the at least one overvoltage component monitors temperature at different time to ensure it is a current leakage”.
With regard to claim(s) 8-9 and 18-19, the phrase “e.g.” (for example) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
For purposes of the examination, the limitation(s) have been interpreted as:
Claim 8, “wherein if the temperature of the first and second overvoltage components is higher than certain safe temperatures (120C).”
Claim 9, “wherein monitor the temperature at time t0 and then monitor the temperature a delay later at t1, 1 sec later.”
Claim 18, “wherein if the temperature of the first and second overvoltage components is higher than certain safe temperatures (120C).”
Claim 19, “wherein monitor the temperature at time t0 and then monitor the temperature a delay later at t1, 1 sec later.”
With regard to claim(s) 10 and 20, the limitations “, wherein the sensing and the control circuit uses the temperature sensors attached to MOVs to monitor if there is current running through, because MOVs run hot if that happens there's a startup testing sequence where the sensing and the control circuit monitors MOV temperature at start up at two different time moments before power electronics are turned on and if there's a temperature increase, the MOV is leaking, thus it is bad”
First, the feature “temperature sensors” in line 2 of claim 10 and 20; and, the feature “MOVs” in lines 2 and 3 of claim 10 and 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Second, it is unclear whether the “MOVs” recited in line 2 of claims 10 and 20 is this the same as, or different from, the “MOVs” recited on line 3 of claims 10 and 20. Clarification is required.
Third, the limitation “thus it is bad”, it is unclear what “it” is referring to. Clarification is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-6, 11-12, and 15-16 are allowed.
Claim(s) 3-4, 7-10, 13-14 and 17-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The claimed combination found within independent claims 1 and 11 are considered novel and unobvious in view of the prior art of record. The closest prior art is considered to be Lu (US 2025/0226650 A1).
With regard to claim 1, Lu teaches an electronic circuit breaker (ECB) (Fig. 1) configured to provide a fail-safe mode ([0009] lines 1-13), comprising: at least one overvoltage component (11, 16 – Fig. 1); a temperature sensor (12 – Fig. 1) attached (see Fig. 2) to the at least one overvoltage component (11 – Fig. 1) ([0029] lines 1-7); and a sensing and control circuit (10 – Fig. 1) configured to monitor temperatures of the at least one overvoltage component (11 – Fig. 1) ([0027] lines 1-9), wherein there is a criterion to decide if the electronic circuit breaker (Fig. 1) should open ([0032] lines 1-22), and wherein the criterion is if monitored temperatures exceed max safe temperature at any time ([0032] lines 17-22).
With regard to claim 11, Lu teaches a method (Fig. 4) of providing a fail-safe mode ([0009] lines 1-13) in an electronic circuit breaker (ECB) (Fig. 1), the method comprising: providing at least one overvoltage component (11, 16 – Fig. 1); providing a temperature sensor (12 – Fig. 1) attached (see Fig. 2) to the at least one overvoltage component (11 – Fig. 1) ([0029] lines 1-7); and providing a sensing and control circuit (10 – Fig. 1) configured to monitor temperatures of the at least one overvoltage component (11 – Fig. 1) ([0027] lines 1-9), wherein there is a criterion to decide if the electronic circuit breaker (Fig. 1) should open ([0032] lines 1-22), and wherein the criterion is if monitored temperatures exceed max safe temperature at any time ([0032] lines 17-22).
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With regard to claim 1, in combination with other limitations of the claim, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest “wherein there are two criteria to decide if the electronic circuit breaker should open, when either criterion is met, and a second criterion is if the monitored temperatures increase at two different time moments during start up.”
Claim(s) 2 and 5-6 are allowed by dependence on claim 1.
Claims(s) 3-4 and 7-10 would be allowed by dependency on claim 1 when the rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) would be overcome.
With regard to claim 11, in combination with other limitations of the claim, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest “wherein there are two criteria to decide if the electronic circuit breaker should open, when either criterion is met, and a second criterion is if the monitored temperatures increase at two different time moments during start up.”
Claim(s) 12 and 15-16 are allowed by dependence on claim 11.
Claims(s) 13-14 and 17-20 would be allowed by dependency on claim 11 when the rejection of these claims under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) would be overcome.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached PTO-892.
Kinsel (US 2025/0069837 A1) teaches a solid-state circuit breaker comprises an air gap, at least one counter and/or a timer, a memory, a radio and a microprocessor to: retrieve saved health data, alert data and counter, timer data from the memory, determine a status of a heath rating by data and comparing the heath rating to a threshold, if it is poor, send a message via a smart phone application (APP) and start a counter or timer, determine if the counter is at a predefined value and/or the timer is expired, if the counter is at a predefined value and/or the timer is expired, turn OFF the breaker and inhibit from being turned on, send a breaker OFF/disabled alert message using the radio to an end user/a customer via the APP, and if the counter is not at a predefined value and/or the timer is not expired, increment/decrement the counter and/or the timer.
Cantagrel (FR 2873510 A1) teaches a method of safeguarding a protection circuit (3) connected to an electric power transmission line (i) for deflecting transient overvoltages thereof, wherein a current (i) traversing at least one current is measured varistor (7) of said protection circuit, characterized in that it comprises: forming, from said measured current, an electrical signal (U2) which is an image of a temperature state of said at least one varistor, compare said image signal to a reference signal (UR) for Io triggering a safety circuit (40) disconnecting said protection circuit from said power line.
Chadwick (US 4,636,910 A) teaches a system having a bus protected against overvoltage by a plurality of series connected zinc oxide varistors in a column, uses temperature sensors to protect the varistors from damage. First temperature sensors detect that a safety tripping temperature has been reached and lower the bus voltage. Second temperature sensors detect a thermal runaway temperature has been reached and disconnect the bus. Normal operation is restored when the detected temperature falls below the safety tripping temperature. To protect against very rapidly increasing overvoltages, the current flow is monitored and when it exceeds a threshold a signal representing current is integrated. When the integrated value reaches a first preset level the voltage on the bus is reduced and when it reaches a second preset level the bus is disconnected to permit the varistors to cool.
Farquhar (US 9,784,785 B2) teaches a method for monitoring the operation of a metal-oxide varistor (MOV) may involve monitoring an operating value of at least one parameter of the MOV using at least one sensor. Further, the method may involve determining, using one or more processors, that a difference between the operating value and a reference value corresponding to the at least one parameter satisfies a predetermined threshold condition corresponding to the at least one parameter. And the method may involve responsive to determining that the difference between the operating value and the reference value satisfies the predetermined threshold condition, transmitting a notification indicative of a potential failure of the MOV to at least one device. The sensors 302 may include sensors configured to monitor an operating value of one or more parameters of the MOV. For instance, the sensors 302 may include one or more temperature sensors configured to monitor a temperature of the MOV, such as a thermocouple, thermistor, silicon bandgap temperature sensor, infrared temperature sensor, or other type of temperature sensor. Further, the sensors 302 may include one or more temperature sensors configured to monitor an ambient temperature of an environment of an MOV.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicolas Bellido whose telephone number is (571) 272-5034. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9:00 am to 5:00 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, Monica Lewis can be reached at (571) 272-1838. 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 (57) 272-1000.
/N.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2838
/MONICA LEWIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2838