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 .
Claims 1-20 of U.S. Application 18/633,274 filed on April 11,2024 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/11/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
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 1-5 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being unpatentable over Uhlig et al (USPGPub 20240012034).
PNG
media_image1.png
525
783
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Prior Art: Uhlig
Regarding claim 1, Uhlig discloses a wide range current sensor chip (using figs 1-3), comprising: a single busbar (100) including one or more constrictions (110); a first sensor (21) with a first threshold range adapted to measure a first current range (known that sensors detect within a specific range), positioned adjacent to one of the one or more constrictions and spaced away therefrom by a first distance (shown in at least fig 3 as space by a distance); and a second sensor (22) with a second threshold range adapted to measure a second current range (shown in fig 3 as having direction detection 25 are opposite. Therefore, they are different), positioned adjacent to one of the one or more constrictions and spaced away therefrom by a second distance, (shown in fig 3) wherein a third current range (such as differential) of the wide range current sensor chip depends on the first threshold range, the second threshold range, the first distance, and the second distance (par 5 discloses differential evaluation and fig3 shows the sensors have opposite detection directions. Therefore, the third range is a combination of the first and second ranges and distances.
Regarding claim 2, Uhlig discloses wherein the wide range current sensor chip is adapted to be incorporated into an electrical circuit with the first sensor and the second sensor in parallel (abstract disclose the detection devices are parallel to each other).
Regarding claim 3, Uhlig discloses wherein the wide range current sensor chip is adapted to be incorporated into an electrical circuit with the first sensor and the second sensor in series (shown in figs 1-3 as the sensors being in series based on orientation).
Regarding claim 4, Uhlig discloses wherein the busbar comprises only one constriction, and wherein the first sensor is positioned adjacent to and spaced away from a first side of a constriction (left side), and the second sensor is positioned adjacent to and spaced away from a second side (right side) of the constriction, where the first side is opposite the second side (shown in figs 2 and 3 as the sensors are on opposite sides of the constriction).
Regarding claim 5, Uhlig discloses wherein the first threshold range and the second threshold range are approximately the same (21 and 22 are the same type of sensors therefore within the same range), and wherein the first distance and the second distance are different (figs 2 and 3 show 21 is closer than 22).
Regarding claim 15, Uhlig discloses a wide range current sensor chip (figs 1-3), comprising: a busbar (100) comprising a straight busbar comprising a first portion (121), a second portion(122), and a first constriction (110) between the first portion and the second portion (between based on orientation); a first sensor (21) with a first threshold range (based on the type of sensor) positioned adjacent to and spaced away from the first constriction by a first distance (distance shown in fig 3) and adapted to measure a first current range; and a second sensor (22) with a second threshold range approximately equal to the first threshold range adapted to measure a second current range (shown at the detection direction 25 is opposite), wherein a third current range of the wide range current sensor chip is wider than the first current range and the second current range (par 39 discloses the third region differs from the 121 and 123. Therefore, would be wider).
Regarding claim 16, Uhlig discloses wherein the busbar is adapted to configure the first sensor and the second sensor in series in an electrical circuit (shown in fig s 1-3 as being in series).
Regarding claim 17, Uhlig discloses wherein the second sensor is positioned adjacent to and spaced away from the first constriction by a second distance greater than the first distance, opposite the first sensor across the first constriction (shown in fig 3 as the second sensor is at a distance greater than the first sensor’s distance).
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a2) as being unpatentable over McNally et al (USPGPub 20250164529).
Regarding claim 9, McNally discloses a wide range current sensor chip (using figs 1-5B), comprising: a dual constriction Y-shaped busbar (shown in fig 1) comprising a first portion (middle portion at label Ip), and a first arm (left arm) and a second arm (right arm) extending parallel to each other from the first portion, the first arm comprising a first constriction and the second arm comprising a second constriction (shown in figs 1-5); a first sensor (104a) with a first threshold range positioned adjacent to and spaced away from the first constriction by a first distance and adapted to measure a first current range; and a second sensor (104b) with a second threshold range positioned adjacent to and spaced away from the second constriction by a second distance and adapted to measure a second current range (abstract and par 4 discloses the sensors are aligned with the notches. Therefore, positioned adjacent and spaced away from their respective constriction), wherein a third current range (current range from the first portion in the middle of the arms) of the wide range current sensor chip is broader than the first current range and the second current range (since the first portion is wide than the constriction arms, the current range would be broader), and wherein the dual constriction Y-shaped busbar is adapted to configure the first sensor and the second sensor in parallel in an electrical circuit (see fig 1 where the sensors are parallel to one another).
Regarding claim 10, McNally discloses wherein the second threshold range is approximately the same as the first threshold range (par 17 discloses having Hall elements. Therefore, would be the same sensor and therefore in the same range).
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 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uhlig et al (USPGPub 20240012034) in view of McNally et al (USPGPub 20250164529).
Regarding claim 6, Uhlig does not fully disclose wherein the first threshold range is not the same as the second threshold range, and wherein the first distance and the second distance are approximately the same.
However, McNally discloses wherein the first threshold range is not the same as the second threshold range, and wherein the first distance and the second distance are approximately the same (fig 1 shows the distances are the same and show they are different arms. Therefore, are different threshold ranges). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Uhlig in view of McNally in order to determine current along the conductor.
Regarding claim 7, Uhlig does not fully disclose wherein the busbar comprises two constrictions, and wherein the first sensor is positioned adjacent to and spaced away from a first constriction having a first constriction width by the first distance, and wherein the second sensor is positioned adjacent to and spaced away from a second constriction having a second constriction width by the second distance.
However, McNally discloses wherein the busbar comprises two constrictions, and wherein the first sensor is positioned adjacent to and spaced away from a first constriction having a first constriction width by the first distance, and wherein the second sensor is positioned adjacent to and spaced away from a second constriction having a second constriction width by the second distance (shown in fig 1 as the sensing elements being around notches in the arms of the conductor). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Uhlig in view of McNally in order to determine current along the conductor.
Regarding claim 8, Uhlig does not fully disclose wherein the third current range further depends on the first constriction width, the second constriction width, and a difference therebetween.
However, McNally discloses wherein the third current range further depends on the first constriction width, the second constriction width, and a difference therebetween (pars 36 and 39 discloses differential sensing using the two sensors. Therefore, there is a difference between which would include the third current range). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Uhlig in view of McNally in order to determine current along the conductor.
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McNally et al (USPGPub 20250164529) in view of Lehmann et al (USPGPub 20240036083).
Regarding claim 11, McNally does not fully disclose wherein the wide range current sensor chip is adapted to electrically couple to one or more batteries and measure current to and from the one or more batteries.
However, Lehmann discloses wherein the wide range current sensor chip is adapted to electrically couple to one or more batteries and measure current to and from the one or more batteries (par 7 discloses used for a vehicle battery). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine McNally in view of Lehmann in order to determine current in a vehicle battery.
Regarding claim 12, McNally does not fully disclose wherein the wide range current sensor chip is adapted to measure a high charging current, a low operating current, and currents therebetween flowing to and from one or more batteries in an electric or hybrid vehicle.
However, Lehmann discloses wherein the wide range current sensor chip is adapted to measure a high charging current, a low operating current, and currents therebetween flowing to and from one or more batteries in an electric or hybrid vehicle (par 40 discloses measuring charging events flowing to and from the vehicle. Therefore, also measuring low operating current). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine McNally in view of Lehmann in order to determine current in a vehicle battery.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McNally et al (USPGPub 20250164529) in view of Uhlig et al (USPGPub 20240012034).
Regarding claim 14, McNally discloses wherein a first constriction width of the first constriction and a second constriction width of the second constriction are approximately equal (shown in fig 1. McNally does not fully disclose Uhlig discloses wherein the first distance is greater than the second distance.
However, Uhlig discloses wherein the first distance is greater than the second distance. (shown in fig 2 where the distance between 21 and 22 are at difference distance). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine McNally in view of Uhlig in order determine current at different intervals.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13, and 18-20 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.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a wide range current sensor chip, comprising: wherein the first distance and the second distance are approximately equal, and wherein a first constriction width of the first constriction is greater than a second constriction width of the second constriction in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a wide range current sensor chip, comprising: wherein the wide range current sensor chip further comprises a second constriction and a third portion, and wherein the second sensor is positioned adjacent to and spaced away from the second constriction by a second distance greater than the first distance in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 19, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a wide range current sensor chip, comprising: wherein the wide range current sensor chip further comprises a second constriction and a third portion, and wherein the second sensor is positioned adjacent to and spaced away from the second constriction by the first distance, and wherein a first constriction width of the first constriction is greater than a second constriction width of the second constriction in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 20, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a wide range current sensor chip, comprising: wherein the first current range is defined by a first upper threshold and a first lower threshold, the second current range is defined by a second upper threshold and a second lower threshold, and wherein the first upper threshold and the first lower threshold are greater than the second upper threshold and the second lower threshold, respectively in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Barwig et al (USPGPub 20240302413): discloses a current sensor with a cutout portion.
Selig et al (USPGPub 20240162789): discloses a conductor with a constriction.
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