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 .
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 3 is 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.
Claim 3 requires “a gauged opening is a bore with a diameter less than or equal to 12.5 mm and a central longitudinal axis of which passes through said surface without any electrical insulation of the at least one electrically conductive element and facing which surface said gauged opening is arranged in said electrical insulation housing.” It is not clear what is meant by the phrase “a gauged opening is a bore… facing which surface said gauged opening is arranged in said electrical insulation housing.” The gauged opening is referencing itself in its own arrangement to itself. The claim as written provides no adequate frame of reference to understand where the claimed elements are placed. What surface is the gauged opening facing? What frame of reference defines any original setup of the gauged opening to define another surface later? Clarification is required. Examiner will assume the broadest reasonable interpretation to advance prosecution.
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.
(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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) & (a)(2) as being anticipated by Fornage et al (U.S. PGPub # 2011/0183537).
Regarding Independent claim 1, Fornage teaches:
A checking interface for an electrical power supply line of an aircraft, the electrical power supply line configured to supply power to an electrical equipment item of said aircraft, said checking interface comprising:
an electrical insulation housing (Fig. 3 Elements 110, 336, & 338. See paragraph 0033.) passed through by at least one electrically conductive element of the electrical power supply line (Fig. 3 Elements 312 & 314. See paragraph 0030.) connected to said equipment item (Fig. 3 Elements 312. See paragraph 0030.) and provided with an electrically insulating sheath outside of said equipment item (Fig. 3 Elements 312 & 314 and the insulation disclosed in paragraphs 0030, 0032, 0034, & elsewhere.) and of said electrical insulation housing (Fig. 3 Elements 110, 336, & 338. See paragraph 0033.) and having a surface without any electrical insulation inside said electrical insulation housing (Fig. 3 Elements 312 & 314 and the insulation disclosed in paragraphs 0030, 0032, 0034, & elsewhere.),
a gauged opening arranged in said electrical insulation housing facing said surface without any electrical insulation for each of the at least one electrically conductive elements (Fig. 3 Elements 302 & 306. See paragraph 0031.),
each of the at least one electrically conductive elements linked to a connection stud arranged on an outer surface of said electrical insulation housing (Fig. 3 Elements 304 & 310. See paragraph 0030.), and,
a removable neutralization conductor connected to a reference equipotential and having a terminal connector configured for a connection to a connection stud of said electrical insulation housing is available for a connection to said stud (See paragraph 0030.).
PNG
media_image1.png
498
722
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
364
766
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Fornage teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Fornage teaches two electrically conductive elements pass through said electrically insulating housing (Fig. 3 Elements 312 & 314. See paragraph 0030.), said electrically insulating housing comprising two gauged openings respectively arranged facing two surfaces without any electrical insulation each arranged on one of said two electrically conductive elements (Fig. 3 Elements 110, 336, & 338. See paragraph 0033. Fig. 3 Elements 302 & 306. See paragraph 0031.), two connection studs respectively linked to the two electrically conductive elements (Fig. 3 Elements 304 & 310. See paragraph 0030.) and two removable neutralization conductors linked to a reference equipotential and each comprising a terminal connector each configured for a connection to one of said studs (See paragraph 0030.).
Regarding claim 3, Fornage teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Fornage teaches a gauged opening is a bore with a diameter less than or equal to 12.5 mm and a central longitudinal axis of which passes through said surface without any electrical insulation of the at least one electrically conductive element and facing which surface said gauged opening is arranged in said electrical insulation housing (Fig. 3 Elements 302, 306, & 312. See paragraph 0030 wherein “12 American Wire Gauge” is disclosed for wires 312. That is a standard wherein the wires are 2.05mm. The gauged opening would necessarily be less than or equal to 12.5mm to effectively hold the wires.).
PNG
media_image3.png
673
975
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
364
766
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Fornage teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Fornage teaches any connection stud and any neutralization conductor is electrically insulated to prevent any touch contact with an element linked electrically to an electrically conductive element (Fig. 3 Elements 312 & 314. See paragraph 0030. The device would not work properly if the wires were not insulated and/or kept separated. If they are not insulated or kept separated, there could be a short, a fault, or a catastrophic failure of the device.).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fornage et al (U.S. PGPub # 2011/0183537).
Regarding claim 5, Fornage teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Fornage does not explicitly teach the checking interface according to claim 1, arranged on a face of an electrical equipment item of an aircraft.
But it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to have the checking interface arranged on a face of an electrical equipment item of an aircraft because a wiring harness interconnect can be used on any device that has a wiring harness or a wiring system with junctions.
Regarding claim 6, Fornage teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Fornage teaches an electrical equipment item and the checking interface according to claim 1 (See above.).
Fornage does not disclose an electrical system of an aircraft comprising: an electrical equipment item and the checking interface according to claim 1.
But it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to have an electrical system of an aircraft comprising: an electrical equipment item and the checking interface because any device that requires a wiring harness or a wiring system with junctions would necessarily need an efficient, reliable, & durable means of making connections and checking said connections.
Regarding claim 7, Fornage teaches or makes obvious all elements of claim 6, upon which this claim depends.
Fornage teaches at least one measurement or discharge probe configured to be inserted into a gauged opening of said interface and to establish an electrical contact with said surface without any electrical insulation disposed facing said opening (Fig. 3 Elements 312 & 314. See paragraph 0030.).
Regarding claim 8, Fornage teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Fornage teaches the electrical system according to claim 6 (See above.).
Fornage does not disclose teach an aircraft comprising: the electrical system according to claim 6.
But it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to have an aircraft comprising: the electrical system according to claim 6 because any device that requires a wiring harness or a wiring system with junctions would necessarily need a connection device that is reliable, durable, and prevents interference.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art listed does not anticipate alone or combine in an obvious manner to teach the invention claimed by applicant. The requirement to put the specific structure through the specific steps disclosed in claim 9 has not been found in the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 9, Fornage teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Fornage does not explicitly teach a method for checking and neutralizing an electrical power supply line of an aircraft, the method being executed via the checking interface according to claim 1, the method comprises:
carrying out a measurement of electrical potential of the at least one electrically conductive element, with respect to the reference equipotential, by insertion of a measurement probe into the gauged opening arranged facing said surface without any electrical insulation of said at least one electrically conductive element,
carrying out a discharge of electrical potential of at least said electrically conductive element by insertion of a discharge probe into the gauged opening arranged facing said surface without any electrical insulation of said at least one electrically conductive element, and,
carrying out a neutralization of at least said electrically conductive element of the electrical power supply line by connecting a terminal connector of a removable neutralization conductor to the connection stud of the checking interface linked to said at least one electrically conductive element of the power supply line.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art listed but not cited represents the previous state of the art and analogous art that teaches some of the limitations claimed by applicant.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P MCANDREW whose telephone number is (469)295-9025. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6-4:30.
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 Rodak can be reached on 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P MCANDREW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858