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 are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: test conductor 31 [see page 11, line 1] and test conductor path 32 [see page 11, lines 2-3]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a chip [claim 6], switching transistor [claims 9 and 11], resistor [claim 10] must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 10, of the claim “the test current generator” should be change to --a test current generator-- in order to avoid an insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 12 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 12 and 18-19, the claims disclosed the limitation “evaluation using pattern recognition algorithms.” However, the specification does not in such full, clear, and concise described what is the formula or steps of the pattern recognition algorithms nor how this algorithms used to leaned the pulse sequence of the test current.
For examination purposes, the examiner is not given patentable weigh to the above limitation until furth explanation is given by the applicant.
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.
Claims 4 and 7-8 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.
a)Regarding claim 4, the claim states: “…the test conductor loop (23) is formed under the current sensor (21) as a test conductor path parallel to the predetermined main current path of the conductor loop.” However, it is not clear which “conductor loop” is being referred at the end of the claimed since claim 1, which claim 4 depends from, claimed both “sensed…conductor loop” and “test conductor loop”.
For examination purposes, the examiner is taking a position that the loop in claim 4 is being referred to as test conductor loop until further explanation is given by applicant.
b) Regarding claim 7, the claim states: “…the test conductor loop is formed as a helical shape with a plurality of parallel conductor path portions with respect to the predetermined main current path of the conductor loop sensed by the current sensor.” However, it is not clear which “conductor loop” is being referred at the end of the claimed since claim 1, which claim 7 depends from, claimed both “sensed…conductor loop” and “test conductor loop”.
For examination purposes, the examiner is taking a position that the loop in claim 7 is being referred to as test conductor loop until further explanation is given by applicant.
c) Regarding claim 8, the claim states: “The device according to claim 1, wherein the test current generator is a pulse generator for generating defined current pulses.” However, “the test current generator” is not presented in claim 1. It is not clear if claim 8 should depend from claim 2 instead since claim 2 disclosed “a test current generator”. If that is not true, then the following would apply the limitation "the test current generator" in line 1 has insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For examination purposes, the examiner is taking a position that claim 8 depends from claim 2 instead of claim 1 until further explanation is given by the applicant.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tzivanopoulos et al (US Pub 2012/0319473).
PNG
media_image1.png
456
496
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Tzivanopoulos et al disclose [see Fig. 2 above] a device for detecting a faulty operation of a current sensor (core 21) [see paragraph [0013] for details] based on a magnetic-field- sensitive sensor element (sensor element 22) [see paragraph [0026 ] for details], comprising: a sensed busbar (conductor 20) or conductor loop which is formed in a measurement plane of the current sensor (21) and which can be sensed by the current sensor (21) at least in a measuring region, a test conductor loop (test winding/coil 23) arranged in spatial proximity to the busbar (20) or conductor loop to be sensed by the current sensor (21), wherein the test conductor loop (23) is arranged in a plane which is parallel to the measurement plane of the sensed busbar (20) or conductor loop and is adapted to [see Note below] a main current path predetermined by the busbar (20) or conductor loop such that a modulated test current introduced into the test conductor loop (23) can be sensed by magnetic-field-sensitive sensing (22) in the measuring region of the current sensor (21) together with a current of the main current path.
[Note: Claim limitations that employ phrases of the type “adapted to” are typical of claim limitations, which may not distinguish over the prior art. It has been held that the recitation that an element is “adapted to” performing a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. See also MPEP 2111.04]
Regarding claim 2, Tzivanopoulos et al disclose wherein the test conductor loop (23) is connected to a test current generator (test current generator 24) for generating the modulated or pulsed test current.
Regarding claim 3, Tzivanopoulos et al disclose wherein the test conductor loop (23) and the test current generator (24) are galvanically isolated from the sensed busbar (20) or conductor loop.
Regarding claim 4, Tzivanopoulos et al disclose wherein the test conductor loop (23) is formed under the current sensor (21) as a test conductor path parallel to the predetermined main current path of the conductor loop (23) [see above 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph for explanation].
Regarding claim 7, Tzivanopoulos et al disclose wherein the test conductor loop (23) is formed as a helical shape [see Fig. 2 above] with a plurality of parallel conductor path portions with respect to the predetermined main current path of the conductor loop (23) [see above 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph for explanation] sensed by the current sensor (21).
Regarding claim 13, Tzivanopoulos et al disclose [see Fig. 2 above] a method for detecting a faulty operation of a current sensor (core 21) [see paragraph [0013] for details] based on a magnetic-field- sensitive sensor effect (sensor element 22) [see paragraph [0026 ] for details] in a busbar (conductor 20) or conductor loop sensed for current measurement, comprising the following steps: A. providing an additional sensable test conductor loop (test winding/coil 23) arranged adjacent to the busbar (20) or conductor loop sensed in a magnetic-field-sensitive manner by the current sensor (21) for applying a modulated test current, B. detecting first measurement values with the current sensor (21) for successive current measurement and current monitoring [via testing unit 25] in a predetermined measuring region of the sensed busbar (20) or conductor loop, C. generating a pulse-modulated test current with a test current generator (test current generator 24), D. introducing the modulated test current into the test conductor loop (23) in a temporally limited manner [via test current generator 24], E. detecting at least a second measurement value through current measurement with the current sensor (21) with overlaying of magnetic fields of the test current in the test conductor loop (23) and of the current in the busbar (20) or conductor loop which is sensed in a magnetic-field-sensitive manner by the current sensor (21), and F. determining a differential current from the first and second measurement values and evaluating the differential current for detecting deviations of the differential current from an introduced waveform of the test current [via test current generator 24 and testing unit 25].
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(s) 8 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tzivanopoulos et al (US Pub 2012/0319473) in view of Kunze et al (US Patent 6,433,545).
PNG
media_image2.png
712
775
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
418
552
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 8 and 14-15, Tzivanopoulos et al disclose wherein the test conductor loop (23) is connected to a test current generator (test current generator 24) for generating the modulated test current. However, the prior art does not disclosed the test current generator is a pulse generator provided as an individual pulse as claimed. Kunze et al disclose [see Fig. 2 above] a sensed busbar (conductor 4) and a test conductor loop (coil 3) arranged in spatial proximity to the busbar (4) or conductor loop wherein the test conductor loop (3) is arranged in a plane which is parallel to the measurement plane of the sensed busbar (4) or conductor loop and such that a modulated test current introduced into the test conductor loop (3) can be sensed by magnetic-field-sensitive sensing (sensor element 2) in the measuring region of the current sensor together with a current of the main current path, wherein the test conductor loop is connected to a test current generator (current pulse generator 5) which is a pulse generator for generating defined current pulses [see col. 7, lines 36-37 and 50-52]. Further, Kunze et al teaches that the addition of test current generator as a pulse generator is advantageous because it helps evaluate the signals of sensors elements, in connection with which for the purpose of eliminating an interference signal that is proportional to the zero offset when the sensor elements is in connection for high-resolution measurements of a magnetic field or of a magnetic field gradient, or of values based thereon, for example for potential-free current measurements. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of Tzivanopoulos et al by substituting the current generator for the current pulse generator as taught by Kunze et al in order to evaluate the signals of sensor elements in connection for high-resolution measurements of a magnetic field or of a magnetic field gradient, or of values based thereon, for example for potential-free current measurements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for details.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6, 9-11 and 16-17 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 5, the primary reason for the allowance of the claim is due to the test conductor loop is provided as a test conductor layer and is integrated by multilayer thin-film technology on a sensor printed circuit board of the current sensor.
Regarding claim 6, the primary reason for the allowance of the claim is due to the test conductor loop is provided as a test conductor layer and is realized as a conductive frame in one or more layers on a chip of the magnetic-field-sensitive sensor element of the current sensor.
Regarding claim 9, the primary reason for the allowance of the claim is due to the test current generator has at least one switching transistor for generating pulses, a pulse length limiter and a current limiter. Since claim 11 depends from claim 9, it also has allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 10, the primary reason for the allowance of the claim is due to the test current generator has a series capacitor as a pulse length limiter and a fixed resistor as a current limiter.
Regarding claims 16-17, the primary reason for the allowance of the claim is due to the test current is provided as a rectangular pulse, sawtooth pulse or sine pulse, a or in a pulse sequence thereof as a recurrence of identical or different pulses.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERMELE M HOLLINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-1960. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-3:30pm.
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, Lee E 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.
/JERMELE M HOLLINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858